Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GLC Player
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. Cirt (talk) 10:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- GLC Player (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)
I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 04:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: No sources found to show notability, search shows only that it exists. Mattg82 (talk) 18:57, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Deletionists SUCK! Try to compensate your problems other way. No other reason I have. Some reading: strategy:Proposal:Change Wikipedia Notability Guidelines Ragerds, --Kozuch (talk) 20:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you really think that this keep !vote will help save the article? Joe Chill (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Nothing to indicate why it's notable other than its existence and its status as FOSS. By those criteria, every utility in the GNU repository should have its own article, and that is obviously not the case. --Alan (talk) 01:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Literally no references at all. ConCompS (Talk to me) 02:06, 29 December 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.