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--
Ymblanter (
talk) 08:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references apart from tech.co, a source which does not appear to meet
WP:RS standards as it has no clear editorial policy and accepts paid/sponsored posts. App store inclusion does not confer notability. A search turned up no significant
WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an
SPA as possibly promotional.
Dialectric (
talk) 00:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as newly founded with unlikely enough solid in-depth third-party coverage sources for a better article yet.
SwisterTwistertalk 07:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)reply
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.
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--
Ymblanter (
talk) 08:37, 3 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references apart from tech.co, a source which does not appear to meet
WP:RS standards as it has no clear editorial policy and accepts paid/sponsored posts. App store inclusion does not confer notability. A search turned up no significant
WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an
SPA as possibly promotional.
Dialectric (
talk) 00:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as newly founded with unlikely enough solid in-depth third-party coverage sources for a better article yet.
SwisterTwistertalk 07:41, 1 March 2016 (UTC)reply
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.