- 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. v/r - TP 14:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- ThinkingRock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested prod. Article is about software with no significant coverage in reliable sources provided and none found. TNXMan 12:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - 3rd party coverage is not significant enough to establish notability. Lifehacker link is independent coverage, but only has 1 sentence mention of the product. Dialectric (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2011 (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.