- 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 keep. Fritzpoll (talk) 13:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- WinEdt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non-notable software - no sources to support notability. In fact no claim of notability is made. ukexpat (talk) 20:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- ukexpat (talk) 20:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep news coverage and multiple books. Nominator has made other AfDs on this subject. --Karnesky (talk) 20:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Those appear to be just passing references not amounting to significant coverage. And again, please stop the accusations of pointiness. – ukexpat (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. 78 results on Google Books and 563 results on Google Scholar suggest sufficient notability. Was WP:AFD really a better choice over WP:ATD? — Rankiri (talk) 02:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Rankiri. Salih (talk) 06:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Karnesky and Rankiri have confirmed notability via their Google searches. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2009 (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.