Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MSXML

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 keep. (non-admin closure) KCVelaga (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MSXML

[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)

This article should be deleted as it is not notable and there are no independent sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.142.216.205 (talk) 08:54 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Google scholar reveals significant number of references, isbn 978-1861005892 is also significant. A number of these may not be independent but I think we would be hard pressed to dismiss everything. Can nominator confirm due diligence has been given to WP:BEFORE? There has also been significant unconstructive editing on the article prior to nomination.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it has received significant coverage in reliable academic sources and book coverage and therefore passes WP:GNG. The disruptive editing of the article suggests a negative COI, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 14:38, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep It was a big product, used by everybody, everywhere, back in the day. scope_creep (talk) 08:31, 6 September 2018 (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.