Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mercury Browser


 * 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. reasonable notability wangi (talk) 02:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Mercury Browser

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable mildly promo app article. I made a preliminary attempt to find more reliable references, but came across only passing mentions. Drewmutt ( ^ᴥ^ ) talk  18:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Keep There seem two decent reviews - there might be a dispute on their reliability, but PCMAG and PCWORLD are generally trusted on RS/noticeboard, in terms of reviews. So as well as the in-article source, there's PC World review. So long as those two hold up, there's sufficient sourcing. Nosebagbear (talk) 21:02, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Reviews from PC World, Lifehacker, and PC Magazine have been added that show notability. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2018 (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.