Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EFB-Pro

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. Rje 18:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EFB-Pro

This articles fails WP:SOFT, non-notable, highly specialized software package.Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have been in this industry for 22 years. There is no more misunderstanding between pilots than that of climb gradient requiremnts in transport category aircraft. The text of the article is accurate and adds to the understanding of the factors involved, including 5 minute engine limits etc. It also simply states that the software is the only application that performs this operation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.121.249 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 22 July 2006

Comment the user above also removed the AfD tag from the article and removed this AfD from listing at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_22, both are restored now. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 15:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Spam essay. Wikipedia is not an advertising service. --Xrblsnggt 19:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mango juice^talk 16:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 18:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom, this is also spam. --JCipriani 02:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Delete --Peta 06:41, 2 August 2006 (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.