Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caverphone


 * 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 keep.  Spinning Spark  17:14, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Caverphone

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is unreferenced and the only good coverage I could find online was this source (in Indonesian). There doesn't seem to be any other significant coverage on Google Books, News, or Scholar, although there are a few mentions. We could probably do with a final decision about whether or not this can be kept, as it has been tagged for notability since 2008. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 11:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * weak keep I see references but not a lot; various of these act as if it's something quite well-known, but it doesn't seem to be something that CS texts want to talk about. Mangoe (talk) 15:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley   Huntley  00:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

 
 * weak Keep this paper talks about it as if it were a standard tool, and this one the other Google Scholar hits likewise list it as one the the standard ways of approaching the problem. Apparently not very much used, but there are 3rd party references.  DGG ( talk ) 01:53, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Go   Phightins  !  14:41, 24 November 2012 (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.