Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theme software


 * 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 17:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Theme software

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Was speedied as spam but due to the extensive list of references, I believe a broader review is justified. Much of the problem is that the article lacks context, and it's unclear exactly what the subject software actually does. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I originally put the speedy tag on the article, but can see why the admin chose to AFD instead, as it took me several times reading it to understand what I was reading.... I nom'ed it due to the lack of clarity in reference to, well, everything from notability on up. At best, it seems to be a muddy attempt at advertising. In short, even if it was notable (and I can't see that it is, not clearly anyway) it would require a complete rewrite to become something that someone else can understand.  Dennis Brown (talk) 00:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The content provided is unencyclopedic in nature. It provides no context and needs a fundamental rewrite, not just cleanup. The bibliographic references suggest this might be a computer-science topic which merits encyclopedic coverage, but what's there is useless. --Pnm (talk) 23:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - It's some sort of pattern recognition software. Regardless of notability the article is an incomprehensible mess.  As for notability, it might be notable, but "Theme" is such a simple word that filtering is difficult.  As best I can tell, there's no coverage about it. -- Whpq (talk) 16:59, 1 November 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.