Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SCAR Resource Library (2nd nomination) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/SCAR_Resource_Library_(2nd_nomination)

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. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SCAR Resource Library

I've noticed this was at AfD before, but it wasn't much of a discussion (closed with single !vote of speedy delete?), so decided against Speedy G4 to give it more of a chance. The issues here are notability and a lack of independent references. Also compare with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SCAR (programming language) (2nd nomination) Marasmusine (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete, nn pascal library. 1,810 ghits. Only 2 pages of google results, I think alot of those hits are from forums. Closely resembles (to me anyways,) previously deleted stuff. No assertion of notability except used for RuneScape cheating and "SCAR can also be used for making games aswell as scripts for runescape." Heavily debatable, no sourcing, don't think there ever will be. (Weak delete since I am the nom of the orig afd and both SCAR (pl) afds, don't want to seem like I'm on a vendetta here, I just think they are nn.) OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 03:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions. -- OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 03:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 03:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I stuck it under software since it was an includes library, but is that really the place to put it? OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 03:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete given lack of sources indicating wider notability. Capitalistroadster (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. Terraxos (talk) 03:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no independent sources; no assertion of notability. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someone another 18:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete This probably could be prodded based on the deletion noted in the nom. Slavlin (talk) 01:09, 29 January 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.