Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zen Cart

: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. Sources have been presented by Trevj that he believes demonstrate notability but that have not been evaluated or impeached. I'm going to give this one the benefit of the doubt. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

=[[Zen Cart]]=

:{{la|Zen Cart}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zen_Cart Stats])

:({{Find sources|Zen Cart}})

No evidence of sufficient notability to meet the general notability guideline. Bulwersator (talk) 18:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:16, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

:Keep - Notable. --J (t) 03:35, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

::Why? Bulwersator (talk) 06:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete I can't find any outside coverage that would reasonably allow it to meet WP:GNG Ducknish (talk) 02:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

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

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bmusician 04:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Delete. Not seeing any third-party sourcing or coverage to demonstrate notability. --DAJF (talk) 04:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:PRODUCT. Not great refs, but I did find a couple of books[http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=J-VC1O3O-ecC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false][http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=C7W_AAAACAAJ&dq=%22Zen+Cart%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RNifT5zcAcvn8QPM56mdAQ&ved=0CFEQ6AEwAg] and a university work[http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cscsp/15/]. Surely there must also exist some articles in newsstand computer mags? -- Trevj (talk) 12:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep I'm of the opinion that topics which have been the subject of an actual published non-vanity-press book are notable by default. This appears to have several. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

: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.