Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Framewire Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Framewire

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:33, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Framewire

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of WP:notability. noq (talk) 13:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sources. A search for news articles doesn't bring up anything. The software isn't notable.--xanchester (t) 13:44, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. It is also worth recording and responding to the edit comment from when the earlier Prod was removed: "Added project site and github repository as references, allowing people to review the site and code to confirm the content is correct. If this isn't sufficient, please indicate what would be. This is a new open source project.". However the issue here is evidence of attained notability rather than confirmation of existence, and I've not been able to locate any suitable references to meet WP:NSOFT. AllyD (talk) 20:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete Unreadable article. It's only short, but it still manages to bring in several neologisms and fails to explain them. An "un-framework framework"? Serious lack of independent sources too. With both of these issues, I see no way to keep this. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. — ΛΧΣ21™ 23:51, 21 November 2012 (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.