- 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:12, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
BRCache[edit]
- BRCache (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)
Software library released last year and with a stable release last month. No third-party references, article reads like a library documentation rather than an encyclopedic article. Proposed deletion removed by the article's creator. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 06:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 07:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete at best as none of this suggests a better notable article. SwisterTwister talk 00:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti Talk 19:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Dialectric (talk) 06:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Sotware article of clear unnotability. Most search results are WP mirrors, not even press releases in shady places. Tigraan (talk) 10:12, 17 February 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.