Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of e-book formats


 * 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   Speedy close since original nom never gave his reason. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of e-book formats

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Completing unfinished nom that nobody gave a damn about. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not seeing an actual rationale here; this article has over 250 revisions, so this isn't procedural. How is it that two editors came to independently nom this (two years after creation) within an hour of each other, by the way? I assume that it wasn;t coincidental. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 01:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I saw the red linked afd and fixed it. ScienceApologist was the original nom. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep? No reason for deletion offered. Protonk (talk) 01:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as it's encyclopedia worthy. Unless there's some major reason that I don't see... Gosox5555 (talk) 02:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I was going to vote delete until I looked over the article. The info seems solid and useful, even if in general a "comparison" article would be OR. Borock (talk) 04:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Absolutely no reason why this should have been Afd at all. Sjc (talk) 08:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable subject, useful overview article, reasonably well written. Would be better with a few more sources, and some sub-sections could be expanded, but that's not a reason for deletion. Hard to be more specific unless nominator explains reasons for nomination. Gandalf61 (talk) 13:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * End AfD and Relist - The original nom created a second page nominating this which was deleted under CSD G6, I suspect there is some confusion now. Since there is no rationale here, what purpose does this AfD serve? Speedy close with no prejudice to being immediately relisted. --Taelus (talk) 19:01, 6 October 2009 (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.