Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FASMLIB


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 20:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

FASMLIB

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Conflict of Interest -- Author of FASMLIB Wikipedia page is author of FASMLIB itself -- Wikipedia User Vid512 is Martin Mocko aka. vid. SpooK (talk) 21:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment Desperately needs external validation. In current state appears to be nothing more than an advert. I can't even work out from the article exactly what it is supposed to be about. In my opinion it has no contribution to Wikipedia. Jonathan McLeod (talk) 21:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Does appear to be a conflict of interest for the author, however the text does not seem spammy in nature. Im not familiar with this topic.  Is the subject of the article notable?  If the text is accurate and the subject is notable it should stay despite the conflict of interest.  definatly needs references establishing notability.  Ill wait to see if any are added and until I get a chance to look into the subject before I vote. -Tracer9999 (talk) 02:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I found one source that notes that the software can be used for memory-management purposes, but the source might be considered "self-published". In the absence of a specific notability guideline for software, WP:GNG's standard requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". PleaseStand (talk) 02:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - a notable libraries would make appearances in one the multitude of programming books that are available. I found none in searching Google Books.  -- Whpq (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Whpq. -- Nuujinn (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I concur with Whpq; I checked google books and scholar myself, there's no independent coverage for this library. Pcap ping  20:28, 19 April 2010 (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.