- 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. W.marsh 23:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No assertion of notability per WP:SOFTWARE. Unreferenced, reads like a FAQ. Contested prod. MER-C 08:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, non-notable. yandman 08:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete doesn't assert notability. Hello32020 20:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep if someone can clean it up. I'm a professional web developer and I've heard of it, so I'd say it's notable enough if only we can get a decent write-up. Ubernostrum 23:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete does not assert notability. "I've heard of it" does not establish WP:Notability. -- Chondrite 21:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If you'd like, I can dig up all the places I've seen it referenced. I was simply making the point that, as a professional working in the same ___domain, this is a piece of software I've seen references to in various places (mostly roundups/comparisons of application frameworks). This in itself does not necessarily establish notability, but it does begin to build an argument for notability, if others working in the same ___domain also note that they're familiar with this piece of software. Ubernostrum 02:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- A subject is not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia unless it has, at a minimum, been the focus of multiple, independent published works. -- Chondrite 18:28, 10 December 2006 (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.