Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Splint (programming tool)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  11:12, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Splint (programming tool)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This was PRODed in 2012 but wasn't deleted for some reason (I can't find a de-PROD in the edit history). Independently, this article doesn't meet WP: N -- I can't find any reliable secondary sources about the subject. HyperAccelerated (talk) 00:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  01:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:12, 28 May 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Coco bb8  (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 13:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, a Google Books search brings up plenty of coverage, e.g. here and here. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the second source didn't have much coverage, here is a better example source. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 03:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think the second and third sources you provided give in-depth coverage. The first one might, but Google Books cuts off the passage. The onus is on the person providing sources to show that a source covers a subject with enough depth to establish notability. Are you sure this article should be kept? HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: As Raccoon demonstrates, It is the subject of multiple printed third-party manuals, instruction books, or reliable reviews, written by independent authors and published by independent publishers. —WP:NSOFT Aaron Liu  (talk) 02:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.