Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whrrl


 * 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   Keep (non-admin closure), as per consensus. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Whrrl

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Can't find much about this except that it exists. If anyone can turn up something significant, then it's fine by me. Paxsimius (talk) 03:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. References provided demonstrate notability. I'm a bit confused by this nom. --Dhartung | Talk 04:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Equally confused. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 04:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - while some of the references do read a bit like reinterpreted press releases, they do seem to constitute significant coverage by reliable sources (WashPost, USAToday, eetc.) -Seidenstud (talk) 05:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Reading that page... what is Whrrl came to mind.  Whilst it's referenced, those references do read like press releases.  Should they then carry much weight in assessing notability of Whrrl as a consequence?  Many things in the world of software are vapourware, carrying press releases which can be valid sources... I'd vote weak keep for now, but the page really needs a big re-write to give it some sense of meaning.  Minkythecat (talk) 13:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Minkythecat kinda summed it up for me better than I could. I don't want to necessarily see it deleted; just want to know that it's okay or could use some help.  A rewrite tag, perhaps?  Paxsimius (talk) 19:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey everyone. Can you elaborate a bit on the potential problem with this article and/or the sources used? I don't know what you mean when you say they read like press releases? I tried to keep this article as clean as I can by just summarizing what it does and the news pieces that talk about it. Squitringo1234 (talk) 20:28, 6 June 2008 (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.