Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/INetGUI


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 02:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

INetGUI

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Non-notable, fresh project. Only 279 Google hits, none of them significant. Haakon (talk) 22:43, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Haakon (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 23:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: The project is well maintained and is about to receive VC Sumdeus (talk) 23:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC) — Sumdeus (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep: Citations are provided, topic is notable. Autumray6 (talk) 23:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC) — Autumray6 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: Autumray6 and Sumdeus have been accused of sockpuppetry. Haakon (talk) 23:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: See Sockpuppet investigations/Sumdeus for my comment on the matter, you Nazi - without people like you to deal with I might have contributed to more articles in the past. I deeply apologize for having a life. Sumdeus (talk) 23:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You guys are meatpuppets that use personal attacks. Joe Chill (talk) 23:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability Not Asserted: This is a new project according to article and only cites are self-cites. You need to establish that someone independent cares. Note: I'm on a crusade against resource wasting UI's, but I have no reason to think one way or other regarding your's but if there are papers or patents or review articles that would help. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination; whatever else happens this should share the fate of NovaDB since this is apparently part of that one. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are no non self-published reliable sources I can find.  There is no claim of notability.  The Wikipedia article was created by the author of the software, which is confirmed with his post here. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:51, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Why is this even being argued about? why is there no clear criteria about significance? Why is AfD becoming a battle between paid marketing and those who wish for some stability to Wikipedia? SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
 * Delete - no coverage in reliable sources to establish notability -- Whpq (talk) 17:58, 13 November 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.
 * 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.