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. j⚛e decker^talk 15:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WeWorked[edit]

WeWorked (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH / WP:PRODUCT. Might be good software, but there aren't enough sources out there for notability purposes. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  18:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: no significant coverage in independent secondary reliable sources. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 10:16, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails WP:NSOFTWARE. --Jersey92 (talk) 16:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Software article of unclear notability, created by an SPA as possibly promotional. The PC magazine coverage is too brief to be considered significant, and a search did not turn up any more RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 12:59, 13 July 2014 (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.