- 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. JohnCD (talk) 20:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- WebFlicker CMS (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)
Promotion for non-notable software product by single-issue user with possible conflict of interest. I cannot find any coverage at all. Haakon (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, non notable "content management system" - i.e. back office software that the general public will not interact with. Google News knoweth it not. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: Article was speedy-deleted on December 23. Haakon (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I can't find anything about this in secondary sources. Zero ghits in news archive or gbooks. Not even a blog review. Pcap ping 15:47, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 01:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - does not seem to have enough significant coverage by reliable third parties to merit inclusion; Haakon has noted that it is recreation of previously speedied material. Cocytus [»talk«] 21:18, 10 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.