Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winsock packet editor

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. JERRY ^talk _contribs 22:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Winsock packet editor

I noticed that User:RancidKraut tried to list this at AfD but didn't list it properly (i.e., it was placed in the log, but the user didn't place the tag or create the discussion page).

Anyway, this has been tagged for notability since October and has not had any improvements. It doesn't seem to assert any hint of notability as web content. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This software is not notable and there is serious question as to the validity of the alleged author (see talk). — Preceding unsigned comment added by RancidKraut (talk • contribs)
Weak delete This seems slightly notable, but the other points sway me in the other direction. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 02:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 17:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a notable nuisance for Club Penguin.http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0703080167mar08,0,4256114.story.--Seriousspender (talk) 00:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a single recommendation is not enough to meet WP:N since it does not address or evaluate the software in any depth. TerriersFan (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2008 (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.