Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaws Project


 * 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. The Helpful  One  17:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Jaws Project

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable CMS/blog software Blowdart | talk 11:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This was tagged as blanked by author, but is actually the result of a copy and paste move of Jaws (CMS) created by a different editor, which now redirects here). So let's discuss the merits of the software here under whichever title--Tikiwont (talk) 14:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. --Closedmouth (talk) 14:28, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Afz's edits were confusing. Actually we could have deleted it per G6 and fixed the move, which we still should do if the article is kept.--Tikiwont (talk) 15:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. This suggests a little notability for this project; not just anything gets worked on as part of Google Summer of Code. Beyond this, though, all the sources I see are either routine new version announcements, or entries in databases that aim to be comprehensive.  But maybe I'm missing some additional sources, as there certainly are a lot of hits for this one. JulesH (talk) 15:47, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Jaws_CMS not suitable name for jaws, because jaws is framework, the CMS is native and official product, that build by this framework —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afz (talk • contribs) 14:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, this AfD is now about both.--Tikiwont (talk) 15:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  StarM  07:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete for apparent lack of reliable sources.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:16, 19 January 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.