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 keep. With merge suggestions. I encourage discussion of mergers on the talk page or boldy executing one. (non-admin closure) NonvocalScream (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RExcel[edit]

RExcel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Contested prod. Article is about a software add-in, only sources found are coding documents. TN‑X-Man 14:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A search for sources finds nothing that could legitimately fulfill WP:N. Debate 木 15:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless sources found. If sourced, the add-in is almost certainly notable. Stifle (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with R where it would be germane enough. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I added links to the sources and references and hope that this is now sufficient. I followed the role model of te R Commander entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.121.57.15 (talk) 21:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge as article quality is ordinary. WikiScrubber (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge Insufficient material for an article. --Regents Park (count the magpies) 21:10, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Compare with the R Commander entry, which has less information and is an entry on its own. The people behind the R main entry will quite probably object merging this entry.

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.