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. Joyous! | Talk 02:04, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maxwell Meyer[edit]

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

Insufficient evidence of notability. Sure, there are a lot of sources (to the point of ridiculousness), but none of them appear to constitute significant coverage from reliable sources. IagoQnsi (talk) 01:56, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete total lack of significant coverage in reliable sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:01, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Yet another article based on passing mentions - fails WP:GNG on that basis. Exemplo347 (talk) 17:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I just spent 10 minutes looking for anything significant to add to this article and there's really nothing. I would suggest merging this article with Getmii (app) if that page survives its own AfD discussion Exemplo347 (talk) 19:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete An overkill of passing mentions is not significant enough to pass WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:43, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agreed with the above, only sources I can find talk about the subject and the company in passing (an alumni newsletter) rather than anything of substance. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ Talk 18:27, 6 December 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.