Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intervals (software) (2nd nomination)

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. --MelanieN (talk) 22:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Intervals (software)

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

Non notable software. Inadequate citations. Paid editor. Prev. article was non-consensus because almost nobody commented. We need to pay attention to getting rid of articles like this. DGG ( talk ) 21:39, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe delete as my searches found nothing better than the current sources. Inviting @MrX and BeenAroundAWhile: for comment. SwisterTwister talk 22:25, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The subject fails WP:GNG for lack of available, independent sources.- Mr X 23:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nomination. I was unable to find adequate coverage in reliable sources to warrant an article. Jujutacular (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2015 (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.