Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hackolade

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. Not a lot of participation, but even searching the links provided shows nothing, so the one keep argument is too weak to override the consensus to delete. It isn't likely that breaking tradition and relisting again would provide a different outcome. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 12:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Hackolade

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Hackolade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Mentioned in various sources; most of the refs are refs to other software with which it can be used, Not one substantial 3rd party reliable published source DGG ( talk ) 01:00, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

• Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing. --Cewbot (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Logs: 2016-07 ✗ G11, 2016-07 ✗ deleted, 2016-07 ✗ deleted

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

• Delete, lack of substantive sources. - MrOllie (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

• Keep Here are a couple book sources: [1], [2] ~Kvng (talk) 13:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:59, 20 April 2021 (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.