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

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. Even author wants it deleted. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

InterModule

Seens to be a non-notable sourceforge project; fails WP:NOTABILITY. Ironho lds 11:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of the WP:NOTABILITY guideline does this article fail? I'd like to improve it, although improving it doesn't really help notability all that much, but don't delete it yet.. (I forgot how to put the holdon template to stop deletion). 'Coz I just wanna fix it before it goes... *weep* Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable.". Ironho lds 11:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only a kid... what exactly does that mean..? (sorry for such a dumb question) Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It needs to have recieved some kind of media coverage, i.e articles in newspapers, awards, so on so forth. Ironho lds 11:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does this mean that it'll have to stay deleted until some significant media coverage arrives, and only then can I create the page on it? Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely yes. If you feel it has a chance of surviving the articles for deletion process, you can leave the page where it is. If you feel like saving some time, on the other hand, because I honestly dont think it will pass, just add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Ironho lds 11:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it'll last till then... Please leave it - it might get some coverage soon, though it'll be quite hard because it is maintained by an individual - me. Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but I can just about guarantee it won't pass. If you know it has no independent coverage, why bother wasting time? Ironho lds 11:38, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only doing this not for advertising: but to tell people a bit about my project. I'M NOT ADVERTISING, so don't get the wrong idea.. hehehe Juggernaut0102 (talk) 11:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"to tell people a bit about my project" Sorry, but that's advertising :) --Cybercobra (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't say you were, but it's a non-notable project. I can say with certainty that it will be deleted; keeping it at AfD, while your choice, just wastes people's time. Ironho lds 11:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, fails notability. Project appears to be brand new and only has one contributor (this article's creator) according to sourceforge. There are conflict of interest issues with creating an article about your own project. When/if this ever gains notability the article should be created by someone else without a conflict of interest. swa q 20:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. If project becomes widely used, create article then. LotLE×talk 17:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per same reasoning as Swaq gives above. --Cybercobra (talk) 22:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Juggernaut0102 (talk) 05:49, 14 July 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.