Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CourseGem

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:51, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CourseGem

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Störm (talk) 10:18, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 11:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 11:07, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:50, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm not seeing much of any secondary sources related to this subject. It fails WP:WEBCRIT as well. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: none of the six sources meet the golden rule of independence, reliability and significant coverage, thus it appears to fail the general notability guideline. SITH (talk) 14:15, 28 November 2019 (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.