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. The consensus is that neither the Greek website nor software warrant an article. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MyNotes[edit]

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

Lack of notability — billinghurst sDrewth 13:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Improve This article is poorly written and Again, is not notable. Someone should fix it or get rid of it - Happy_Attack_Dog "How`s my reverting? Call 1-800-U-GOT-BLOCKED" (talk) 13:58, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom The article has no content, it's just three external links and a sentence repeated twice. Might be worthy of a speedy. Elassint ^Hi 13:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revert to this version: [1] about the product which had been the subject of the article from 2006 until it was repurposed to this non-notable Greek website 2 days ago. AllyD (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would be bold and effect the revert but am not sure of the etiquette while the article is at AfD. It could also be debatable whether the MyNotes product meets WP:NSOFT in its own right. AllyD (talk) 20:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to let that spam stay up, so I've restored the orginal article, but kept the deletion tag just in case. Elassint ^Hi 21:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - neither the software nor the Greek on-line student community appears to be notable. Gong show 00:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:52, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:52, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 12:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:58, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I agree with User:Gongshow. Even though we have stumbled into an AfD on the software because the page had been repurposed for the Greek website, it highlights the lack of evidence that the software meets the notability criteria. AllyD (talk) 06:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - software article of unclear notability lacking significant coverage in reliable sources. Softpedia, the one independent ref, is a download site and not sufficiently reliable to establish notability. A search turns up more download sites, forum posts, and brief blog mentions, but no significant RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 10:59, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as lacking in depth coverage, as per WP:GNG. If coverage is found and refs add to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:31, 12 April 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.