Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeleGate (networking)


 * 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   no consensus.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 05:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

DeleGate (networking)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Totally unsourced advertisement for non-notable website. Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I am closing this. No need for AfD. It is direct CopyVio and has been resubmitted as a G12 since there's not really anything to discuss about removing copyvios. ;-) Best, R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 20:33, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 20:45, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * CopyVio resolved, reinstated AfD tagging and added AfD transclude template back to this page. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 21:15, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe I removed all infringing text as of 21:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC) ---Adgordo (talk)
 * Please note, it is being proposed for deletion due to non-notable nature of the product/website/company - as well as it serving only advertising purposes (proving notability may help override this one). The Speedy Deletion request for copyright violation has been removed/ended. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 21:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 *  LEANING Delete:  (UNDECIDED 03:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)) Though I am fond of both the company and software (I run OS/2, and they and one other company are the only ones who make such software for OS/2 (and other platforms)), I am not sure if there's anything notable in that. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 21:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * If Squid gets an article, should DeleGate not? --Adgordo 21:25, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Other articles are not proof of notability of this article. Also, please note that the Squid page references numerous other websites. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 21:31, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak keep This seems to indicate that the website is somewhat notable. References certainly wouldn't hurt. --Kvng (talk) 02:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I'd change to a weak keep as well, if cites can be dug out of those and used in the article. I may look into this in the next few days and see if I can help out. R OBERT M FROM LI &#124; TK/CN 03:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 26 August 2011 (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.