Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ProjeLead (2nd nomination)


 * 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   delete per consensus and per CSD G4. More or less the same article and the original actually had sources. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

ProjeLead
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Run-of-the-mill software with no evidence of notability. References provided are not reliable sources, but rather appear to be mere directory listings (i.e. "I have this new software for you to buy/download") or a blog (which, from the content of the text, appears to have been a solicited review). WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

How can you say that workawesome and unixmen are not reliable?!!! can you please prove that before you delete this article? I can probably list at least 10 (project management) softwares on wikipedia that are true Run-of-mill with commercial language and that were listed for delete and are still hanging there. I just wonder how they do that? I am gonna quit arguing as I feel like your decision is made anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cupidon92 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Blogs are not generally considered reliable sources in this context. noq (talk) 00:12, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Recreation with nothing significantly different from the original deleted article. Should have been left as a G4 speedy for an admin to confirm this. noq (talk) 00:12, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't even come close to passing WP:GNG. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:36, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unremarkable software that lacks WP:RS to support WP:GNG. Happy Editing! &mdash;  17:33, 8 August 2011 (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.