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. KrakatoaKatie 17:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noooxml[edit]

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

Article fails WP:NOTABILITY, WP:NOT. Article was created by an WP:SPA account with no other edits other than related to noooxml.org. Wikipedia is WP:NOT#SOAPBOX.

See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#http:.2F.2Fspam.noooxml.org Hu12 11:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless sources giving coverage are found Corpx 15:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete per lack of independent coverage to meet WP:ATT. This Google search shows that very little has yet been published about this campaign, although the broader issue is being discussed on many websites and a few magazines. Wikipedia is not Wikinews. So far the NoOOXML campaign hasn't had enough impact to stand out from tens of thousands of Internet advocacy campaigns (including Microsoft's propaganda campaign supporting the opposing side of the issue). If it gets further published attention beyond open-source advocacy sites, it might merit a merge into a parent article on the document-format controversy, but so far I don't see sufficient sources for that. Barno 18:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless something can be found that meets WP:ATT and WP:NN. --A. B. ^(talk) 20:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- slightly off-topic: see the accusation of Microsoft COI editing at Talk:Noooxml. This is consistent with press reports on the issue of Microsoft COI editing. I think this is something to watch for (although, as I pointed out to the Noooxml article's author, 2 wrongs don't make a right). --A. B. ^(talk) 20:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for all the obvious reasons. It is just people wantiing to promote their petition site hAl 21:40, 3 September 2007 (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.