Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Splore App


 * 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. KaisaL (talk) 01:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Splore App

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Noon notable and promotional, with emphasis on the academic record of the founders, as if it were the least relevant. Where such information is relevant is a press release. Trivial refs, most from the alumni magazine of one of the founders.  DGG ( talk ) 00:38, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete WP:TOOSOON. The best reference is this, although it seems like a disguised attempt at promotion. The other reference is this, a student newspaper at Univ of Southern California. This is not enough for pass WP:GNG. In addition, the app page at apple app store shows 43 reviews for all versions - an extremely low indication of popularity (forget notability) for an app. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:52, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:46, 21 June 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon  05:45, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: An article about a recent software product which has only startup publicity coverage, padded with detail on the originating company's founders. At best WP:TOOSOON for notability. AllyD (talk) 08:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Software article of unclear notability. As above, existing sources are weak and a search turned up no additional significant WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Dialectric (talk) 16:13, 8 July 2016 (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.