Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Structured Search Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Structured_Search

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.

Note. The text which was the subject of this discussion has been restored and is currently at structured search. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:10, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The result was delete. Jenks24 (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Search (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)

Patents alone do not confer notability, and that's all we're going to have here. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 18:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Agreed. I can't find anything about this patent other than notices of the patent itself. LaMona (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010 • (talk) 18:05, 24 August 2014 (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.