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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appbox Pro[edit]

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

Not noticeable application, just a set of toolbox for the iPhone. No one single reference to back it up, all of them pointing to submission web sites. Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:50, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP - stub article with two independent sources. nominator has recently afd and attempted speedy (declined) a handful of iphone application articles conviently after his application article was deleted 16x9 (talk) 21:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please be serious? Miguel.mateo (talk) 07:49, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but strong warning to the nominator to avoid violating WP:POINT. Stifle (talk) 21:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The app is certainly notable. It has been featured as the top paid app in the App Store a few months ago. It has also been downloaded over a million times. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ message • changes) 20:56, 8 April 2010 (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.