- 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. The Bushranger One ping only 00:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- PREST framework (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)
Unremarkable software, toned down from previously deleted promotional articles. Contested PROD. Acroterion (talk) 17:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 17:34, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No evidence of attained notability either in the article or found elsewhere; fails WP:NSOFT. AllyD (talk) 17:39, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- delete It's a framework, one day it might even be a notable one, but at the present this article is completely failing to demonstrate it. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 03:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - software article lacks 3rd party references to establish notaiblity, created by an SPA as possibly promotional.Dialectric (talk) 23:06, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as lacking sourcing, claim of notability and awards. If in-depth coverage in multiple independent sources is added to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:17, 28 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.