Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Net Project Journal


 * 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. Relisting yet again would not likely further clarify conensus, and, as of now, though we have a nomination plus a delete, against just one weak keep, I can't in good conscience say there is actually consensus to delete here, especially with non-latin script sources possibly still out there Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:24, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Net Project Journal

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Apparently non-notable CMS software. Tagged for notability since October 2008. Lacks inline references. References listed at end are all in Russian. However, at first glance they all appear to be either connected with the project or unreliable sites such as forums. A wider Google search seems to return nothing (web, scholar, books and news) of value. The one book I did find lists this article as its source. Pit-yacker (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - No coverage in independent reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 16:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steven   Zhang  Join the DR army! 00:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)




 * Weak keep: I found the following sources:
 * first is rather strong one, second discusses the requirements for software part of the education-related idea citing NPJ as the only viable technical solution. Both are not enough on their own; still they indicate that more sources could be hiding somewhere. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 10:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * first is rather strong one, second discusses the requirements for software part of the education-related idea citing NPJ as the only viable technical solution. Both are not enough on their own; still they indicate that more sources could be hiding somewhere. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 10:01, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * first is rather strong one, second discusses the requirements for software part of the education-related idea citing NPJ as the only viable technical solution. Both are not enough on their own; still they indicate that more sources could be hiding somewhere. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 10:01, 9 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, &mdash;SW&mdash; comment 02:22, 23 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.