Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tahoe-LAFS

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) Mediran (t • c) 01:16, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2012 December 15.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

Tahoe-LAFS

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

Does not meet GNG. No assertion of notability, no secondary sources. Article even makes it clear that it is simply one of many similar products. MSJapan (talk) 01:16, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the links above for Scholar and News reveal a wealth of notable, reliable sources. ciphergoth (talk) 15:03, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, good deal of secondary sources as noted by Ciphergoth (talk · contribs), above. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 02:25, 12 December 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, Sandstein 22:45, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted per discussion in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2012 December 15. Sandstein 22:46, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have added six references. -- Cheers, Riley 07:41, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, WP:SNOW. at nomination it had a secondary (Ars), advise do a quick search next time, but added sources have improved it. Widefox; talk 10:39, 25 December 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.