Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graphics Layout Engine: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Graphics Layout Engine: How does WP:USERG not disqualify all three sources? |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''keep'''. –[[User talk:MuZemike|MuZemike]] 23:26, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
===[[Graphics Layout Engine]]===
:{{la|Graphics Layout Engine}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graphics Layout Engine|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 December 14#{{anchorencode:Graphics Layout Engine}}|View log]]</noinclude>)
Line 25 ⟶ 31:
*'''Keep''' - Changing vote. Czarkoff refs establish notability. My reading of [[WP:USERG]] does not disqualify them. People out there clearly think this is a useful utility. --[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 01:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
*:[[WP:SPS]] says "self-published media ... are largely not acceptable" and offers only two exceptions: (1) published experts and (2) sources writing about themselves. How does [[WP:USERG]] not disqualify all three of the sources Czarkoff posted? – [[User:Pnm|Pnm]] ([[User talk:Pnm|talk]]) 01:31, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
*::I do not read the list of [[WP:USERG]] exceptions as exhaustive. The refs are a bit better than a blog or a forum. My personal criteria for [[WP:RS]] establishing notability is more permissive than for citations. --[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 03:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - GLE definitely worth an entry in Wikipedia. It's an active open-source software useful for documents producing. May be the actual entry should be completed with some examples of scripts and output results? --[[Special:Contributions/84.100.6.215|84.100.6.215]] ([[User talk:84.100.6.215|talk]]) 08:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||