Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hewan Amharic Software


 * 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. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:18, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Hewan Amharic Software

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lacks requisite RS coverage. Epeefleche (talk) 06:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethiopia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:29, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:30, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I was hoping that this might be saved; this software business makes word processors for the Ethiopian script, and that may have some historic significance.  But I find zero News and Scholar hits. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 13:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)




 * Consider moving/Delete. This article contained and contains nothing about the software company, but it may be the start of an article about Ge'ez/Amharic software. I started editing it from one of the backlogs without noticing it was AfDed, and while there's almost no useful information about Hewan Amharic Software, it does contain a brief (albeit eccentric) history of Amharic representation in software.  That's assuming the history of Amharic software isn't covered better elsewhere (I can't see any such article).

But there's almost nothing about the software company, so the existing content doesn't belong under the existing title. I can't find anything out about the software company, so I don't see a future for the existing article, unfortunately. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It is totally unsourced (and tagged for that malady for nearly five years), so I'm not sure a move makes sense. But if you could create a new article, that passes wp:v, on the indicated subject, that would be fine.  This article, though, should IMHO be deleted.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. There just isn't enough sources to be found to make this meet WP:GNG. Edinburgh   Wanderer  23:11, 14 February 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.