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. ffm 17:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geves[edit]

Geves (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Delete Yet another article about a non-notable piece of software. Likely written by the developer of said software (note that the original editor has only Geve-related edits). WP:ADVERT, WP:NOTE, WP:COI, etc. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 19:13, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete Looks interesting, but without any sources or notability... .. CompuHacker (talk) 20:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unreferenced and unsourced Dreamspy (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete as spam. Article serves only to promote some entity and is not covered significantly in reliable 3rd party sources. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep because of reviews in two family history magazines.--Michael White^T·C 15:35, 14 October 2008 (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.