Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Help and Support Center
- Help and Support Center (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)
This one-line permanent stub suffers from lack of notability and lack of contents. It is run-of-the-mill, not something that stands out and becomes notable. Codename Lisa (talk) 06:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep there seems to be some room for improvements [1], [2]. Usually we don't delete articles just because they are short. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 06:38, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- WP:NOTMANUAL. And we do delete articles because they are not notable. Codename Lisa (talk) 07:08, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- WP:NOTMANUAL is irrelevant. It says that Wikipedia articles are not in themselves instruction manuals, not that they can't be about instruction manuals. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 10:21, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Good point. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 10:39, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
- And incorrect too. Manuals only contain manual-like instructions. You can cite a manual only when you want to write a manual. Otherwise, the only thing you get out of a manual for Wikipedia is passing mentions. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 10:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. The searches linked above by Vejvančický find loads of coverage in independent reliable sources, showing clear notability. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 10:25, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:24, 26 November 2016 (UTC)