Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OpenAerialMap

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) 01:22, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OpenAerialMap

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

No references to demonstrate notability. It's a dead open source community project - lasted about a year. Secretlondon (talk) 12:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 13:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 13:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—Dead project, no coverage in anything resembling a reliable source, no notability. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 16:00, 24 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, →B music ian 01:33, 25 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, →B music ian 02:05, 1 June 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, -Scottywong | verbalize _ 23:10, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How many times does this get relisted? Secretlondon (talk) 00:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm not finding any references to this, beyond the original project documentation and Wikipedia rip-off books, so no evidence of achieved notability. AllyD (talk) 06:55, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
20-Mule-Team Delete: So Some Guy puts this unsourced article up as his last contribution to Wikipedia. Several years on, the only "improvement" to the article is a notice that the project in question (of which no one seems ever to have heard) is defunct. Heck, the project's creator even agrees that no one cares in an archived e-mail which stated "The lack of community around OAM makes all of these problems much more difficult to handle -- previous cries for help have gone essentially unnoticed." This is close to the gold standard for non-notability. Ravenswing 19:36, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ravenswing. Specs112 t c 19:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only source is the official website. Time to pull the plug. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 14:25, 18 June 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.