Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broadleaf Commerce
- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Broadleaf Commerce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Missing notability and no references from reliable sources Nsendetzky (talk) 16:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 07:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable and no reliable sources. Welshboyau11 (talk) 09:13, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:17, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: the sources in the article are unambiguously unreliable, and the only source I could find (there are several reiterations of the same article in PCWorld, Computerworld UK, Computerworld Singapore – but per WP:GNG they count for one source) is a "Top 10" article with a very brief and blurry description. That said, the subject is a typical software of the genre, so there is nothing to write an article about. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 17:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. Not independently notable, might be possible to merge, but not even sure where to.BennyHillbilly (talk) 06:49, 17 September 2012 (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.