Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9wm
- 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 9wm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I think this fails WP: N. I found this which gives a review of 9wm in a few sentences and some mentions in a couple of books, but nothing more than that. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 16:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: seems to fail WP:NPRODUCT and perhaps WP:NOTCHANGELOG, being largely cited to primary reports of software releases. UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:45, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- 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.