Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PLCLogix

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 11:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PLCLogix

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

Well, this is fun. References are PR releases, a book that doesn't mention it, and dead links. A WP:BEFORE uncovered little. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 06:05, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 06:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! ^{Babymissfortune} 06:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Dead links have been removed. New links have been added. Meets WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCT criteria. Jama555 —Preceding undated comment added 17:04, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:GNG compliant with new references. Banjoman1 20:25, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Article is well-written. References reflect popularity as educational resource. Chipset01 16:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Editors should discuss whether the changes made since the nomination now establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:31, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notability of article has been achieved by changes made after nomination. Peppi35 16:44, 4 January 2018
Delete and I highly doubt that the obvious sock or meatpuppets above have actually read the sourcing, because if they had they would realize that most of the sourcing is about Programmable logic controllers in general, is trivial coverage, or is in primary sourcing. All of that means this does not come near meeting our inclusion standards. I'd also encourage that this be closed or relist by an admin because of the socking issue. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with TonyBallioni. However, I would correct one statement: all the sources in the article are about Programmable logic controllers in general, trivial coverage, or primary. Pavlor (talk) 08:50, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have struck all the keep !votes above as all of the accounts have been CU blocked. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:17, 9 January 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.