Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CodingTeam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. The Bushranger One ping only 03:31, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- CodingTeam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) â (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No third-party verification of importance. Does not appear to meet notability guidelines. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:36, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. âą Gene93k (talk) 00:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. âą Gene93k (talk) 00:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- replied on the talk page of this article, I added sources on the article... If you want to remove my article, deplace to my user profile /CodingTeam â Neustradamus (â) 11:57, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I believe what Neustradamus is requesting is that if the consensus is to delete he would prefer to move it to a sub-page in his name space. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:02, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- replied on the talk page of this article, I added sources on the article... If you want to remove my article, deplace to my user profile /CodingTeam â Neustradamus (â) 11:57, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete. There are some references cited that appear to be from professional web publications, but they all seem to date from CodingTeam's launch four years ago, or to be cursory directory-type listings. I don't see any evidence that this software has gotten significant usage. Yaron K. (talk) 23:38, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 06:49, 28 October 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.