Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mailplane (software)
- 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 no consensus. Not exactly a keep consensus as the discussion has remained mostly superficial. Sandstein 11:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Mailplane (software) (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)
Nominate for deletion Has been tagged as of doubtful notability for over 5 years; couldn't establish notability. Boleyn (talk) 21:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirct TO THE Gmail page Seasider91 (talk) 22:42, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep A Google search does show some tech site reviews. I'm going to give this the benefit of the doubt and say keep. Vacation9 22:55, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 05:17, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: As DUCK notes above, NOTE is met and that is the only criterion of AfD being tested. The tags appear questionable - needs attention from an expert?! Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment – @Maury Markowitz you must have misread I didn't say anything about the article meeting WP:NOTE. I simply delsorted, regards. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 04:36, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting, this is the first time I have heard the term "del sorted". As to my comment above, my bad, I meant Vacation. Everyone's use of fancy SIGs makes it difficult to properly attribute when reading the edit text. There's somewhere a little hackery might help things, but I'm afraid my Wiki-fu is exactly zero. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Yash [talk] 12:14, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 02:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reliable sources on the internet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Retrolord (talk • contribs) 10:02, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What reliable sources? - The Bushranger One ping only 10:11, 28 January 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.