Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BrowseAloud (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete.  Sandstein  11:55, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

BrowseAloud
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

no evidence for notability. I cannot confirm the award, but Idon;t see how it alone would be enough  DGG ( talk ) 02:28, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * BrowseAloud is still no better as a product, although the article is now more favourable to it, since the local IP's addition. It's also still in use across UK local government groups who know no better and are encouraged to see it as some sort of solution. My opinion is much as the last AfD: this is not a good product, no-one should use it, is it valuable for WP to keep this article as a place for a more objective description? Andy Dingley (talk) 09:52, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Dialectric (talk) 11:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete -- a nn product with correspondingly WP:SPIP sources. No evidence of notability or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disability-related deletion discussions. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.