Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dash Express

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

notibility? no good coverage as the software/project is now defunct. Alan - talk 00:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Defunct is meaningless as notability is not temporary. I feel that sourcing on the article itself is sufficient, but others may want to do a quick look through a periodicals database to confirm sourcing. riffic (talk) 03:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Holy cow? There are so many coverage in reliable source, and you call it non-notable? --Reference Desker (talk) 06:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - although a defunct software which abandoned its GPS devices, sufficient references exist for notability as part of the history of GPS and software for GPS devices. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep and close Nominator appears to have a misunderstanding of WP:DEL#REASON, WP:GNG and WP:NTEMP. Even a cursory WP:BEFORE finds the coverage the nominator claims does not exist. And being "defunct" does not make a notable topic suddenly non-notable, else we'd have to delete articles on such "defunct" devices as steam locomotives and covered wagons. Historical notability is quite fine with Wikipedia. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]