Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiPock (2nd nomination)

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. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:17, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiPock

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

This previous AfD closed no consensus. 7 years later, I don't see the kind of coverage I would expect from a product of that age with "a growing user base", other than advertising typical of apps. No one noted the SPA whose only edit was to create this article at the time. MSJapan (talk) 03:37, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak Keep – as meeting WP:GNG and per WP:NTEMP.~~ Weak delete: Two articles found thus far that provide significant coverage and are published by independent, reliable sources (see below). Of course, more sources would be optimal; maybe other users will find more. Perhaps this could be merged somewhere? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:12, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

Reply: I was reasonably certain that TechCrunch and El Pais are the same article in different languages. Also, isn't "diario" used for "blog" in Spanish? MSJapan (talk) 04:18, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source articles have entirely different content. Check out the English-translated version of the El País article. "Diario" means "daily" in Spanish; this word in the url of the source is very likely to denote internally within their company that it was an article published in their daily edition, because it is a daily publication. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:22, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed my !vote to "weak delete". North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon 00:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete. I'm really trying to find sources about the application, other than the sources Northamerica posted. I really can't find other recent sources. The only one I found was from Zone Numerique from 2009. -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:31, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:19, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete, even after going through the sources in the last AfD. I don't think there's enough here to establish notability. Enterprisey (talk!) _{(formerly APerson)} 01:17, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there's enough to show there's still simply not enough convincing, delete entirely. SwisterTwister talk 22:45, 12 July 2016 (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.