Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saguaro (Palm OS)
- 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 no consensus. KTC (talk) 00:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Saguaro (Palm OS) (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)
Tagged for notability for over 5 years; I couldn't establish notability. Boleyn (talk) 10:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep #2 deletion spree. Unscintillating (talk) 01:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Nominating a large number of articles - all of which have been tagged for notability for at least 5 years - does not meet speedy keep no. 2. Boleyn (talk) 09:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The applicable terminology from WP:SK#2 is "unquestionable disruption". Unscintillating (talk) 02:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Neutralitytalk 11:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:43, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It appears to meet the GNG with the sources in the article and [1] for example. Is there a flaw in that source or the others that quickly come up on a web search? I'm assuming the nom and !voter above searched, so I assume they have some objection... Hobit (talk) 14:17, 30 January 2013 (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.