Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peer2mail


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Mind matrix  15:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Peer2mail
One in literally thousands "programs that download email from mail servers". Do we need to document them ALL? No. Timecop 11:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. VegaDark 11:11, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, no claim to notability --Quarl 11:33, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia is (trying to be) the sum (I.E. Total or ALL) of human knowledge. Jcuk 22:15, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and Extend P2M is indeed one of the most advanced of these kind of programs, and much better comparing to "literally thousands" of other alternatives. There are lots of program articles, so why not this one?hudd 22:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry dude, but something started in 2004 as opposed to an email program thats been around for over a decade or another decade, does not sound nearly as notable. Not to mention >6million google hits for Eudora (email client), and ~3million for Pegasus Mail, while only 200,000 for Peer2Mail most of which are duplicate links off download sites. My vote still stands as Delete. --Timecop 00:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * well wikipedia is not a comparison site, netiher these programs are the same type, except that they are doing things with mail servers but technically any computer with a modem and telnet can do this. i am going to write a better explaination of what it does, then its up to others to choose. hudd 01:44, 27 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete or Expand The article, as is, is AfD material. However, it may be noteworthy, but who will know unless more information is provided? --GNAA Staos 00:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand per above. -- JJay 00:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete just another copyright violation tool -- Femmina 01:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as it is now or someone expand it enough to make we want to change my vote. --Pboyd04 02:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable enough. &mdash; mark &#9998; 11:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, nn -- Hosterweis 02:57, 29 December 2005 (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.