Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dlib C++ Library

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. Cirt (talk) 00:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dlib C++ Library (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 20:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Joe Chill (talk) 20:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. FOSS (open-source) software. Samboy (talk) 00:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • This !vote doesn't address notability. Joe Chill (talk) 01:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • FOSS or not is not relevant here. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I can't find any secondary sources discussing this library or even other programs mentioning its use. Wikipedia is not a catalog of free software. Pcap ping 03:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, can't find significant coverage. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I'm not sure what Samboy is thinking, I do wish that he would elaborate. If there is no significant coverage to speak of, it really does not matter if the software is free/open source. JBsupreme (talk) 05:08, 16 January 2010 (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.