Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SimplyTweet

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. Cirt (talk) 11:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SimplyTweet

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

A twitter client with a few reviews linked as sources - but nothing that seems to establish notability. Random Time 16:50, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], and [6]. Joe Chill (talk) 22:17, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Joe. Update the article with these references. SMC (talk) 06:16, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Updated article with links suggested by Joe. Hboon (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As far as I can tell, there are enough sources that are reliable and independent of the subject that confer notability. As such, I think that the article should be kept and expanded, with more references. Cocytus [»talk«] 23:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sources listed above demonstrate adequate significance. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:56, 11 December 2009 (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.