- 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. postdlf (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- YDecode (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)
Basically unsourced - only third party sources are a couple of extremely brief mentions on the FAQ pages for Usenet service providers. I've looked, and aside from some indiscriminate download directory sites, I can't find any good sources, so this fails the general notability guideline and should be deleted. - MrOllie (talk) 13:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Reads like an advertisement SOXROX (talk) 14:19, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no significant coverage found in reliable sources; appears to fail WP:GNG. Gong show 17:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - software article of unclear notability lacking RS references. Search reveals no RS, just download sites and forums. Page was created by an SPA as possibly promotional.Dialectric (talk) 22:51, 19 July 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.