Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirshenbaum


 * 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 keep. -- Scott Burley (talk) 05:41, 29 April 2019 (UTC) The result was no consensus with no prejudice against speedy renomination. On closer inspection, the three sources found by might be significant coverage for ASCII-based phonetic scripts, but it seems Kirshenbaum is only one type of such. For Kirshenbaum specifically, I do not believe these sources represent significant coverage. -- Scott Burley (talk) 00:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Kirshenbaum

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not satisfy WP:GNG. Nardog (talk) 19:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 21:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 21:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep I found a whole rafts worth of references on GBooks.  scope_creep Talk  09:23, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you show us where they are? Nardog (talk) 14:15, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Here is three. Maybe not a raft full.  scope_creep Talk  14:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you think that's significant coverage? Nardog (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Here is three. Maybe not a raft full.  scope_creep Talk  14:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you think that's significant coverage? Nardog (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you think that's significant coverage? Nardog (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per . Also looks like I did some maintenance on it then got distracted a couple of weeks back.Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:52, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd forgotten about this, but it is very established as a term and a technology. It probably worth closing this Afd.  scope_creep Talk  20:57, 27 April 2019 (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.