Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DaFont

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:59, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DaFont

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

I only found trivial mentions for this website. SL93 (talk) 23:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's some (old) discussion about notability on the talk page. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 16:46, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Found a few tangential mentions in computer books, but all they do is name drop. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No coverage in reliable third-party sources; fails WP:GNG and WP:NWEB. →B music ian 22:11, 29 May 2012 (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.