Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simple Bible


 * 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. Tone 17:06, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Simple Bible

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable unreleased software. No evidence of any coverage in reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 18:48, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * speedy delete The software is in fact not even released at this point in time. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:50, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete Not sure why this wasn't a CSD  Thorncrag  18:58, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Because CSD criteria specifically do not include software. (you could perhaps strech it and say the company/org/website rules apply, but I have had admins reject such logic on numerous occasions. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Which is why I nominated the article via AfD. If a CSD had applied, I would have already deleted the article. —C.Fred (talk) 19:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * True under A7... I was thinking more G11. This is probably circular reasoning, but tenable I think.  If it's not notable then one could argue its only purpose is to use Wikipedia as a platform for promotion.    Thorncrag  19:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Should not be deleted Simple Bible's current source code is available, but the official release is not until 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustbunnies (talk • contribs) 19:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)  — Dustbunnies (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - No evidence of coverage in multiple, non-trivial, independent reliable sources per WP:Notability. (If anyone knows of such coverage, please bring it forward.) --DGaw (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no point in having an article about this unreleased software. There are no reliable sources.  It should go. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 23:46, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too long to incubate - delete and it can come back when released. --Legis (talk - contribs) 05:58, 11 December 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.