Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SoftXpand


 * 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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

SoftXpand

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Non-notable software. Now a stub after spam content eliminated, but even many of the unsourced claims to notability made in a previous version are in fact not directly for this software, but for a larger "solution". Hairhorn (talk) 16:47, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: Does not seem to meet WP:NSOFT at this time. -- BenTels (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Undecided: Upon review, I'm undecided. The technology is different than I had first understood, but I'm not sure this is any different than ThinSoft's BeTwin. -- BenTels (talk) 14:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. 19:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)  • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep: I found two relevant sources:
 * Note, the former is a blog, but it is hosted by reliable source — ZDNet.
 * Both reviews focus on this particular software and explicitly note its significance, which seems to be enough for WP:NSOFT and WP:GNG. Still I would be more confident if a better source would be available. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note, the former is a blog, but it is hosted by reliable source — ZDNet.
 * Both reviews focus on this particular software and explicitly note its significance, which seems to be enough for WP:NSOFT and WP:GNG. Still I would be more confident if a better source would be available. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 20:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  TheSpecialUser TSU 08:11, 27 August 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.