Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ChemSep

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--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ChemSep

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

Been deleted twice as WP:CSD#G11, and recreated again and again. Still just here as an advert. No references of any substance. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Someone somewhere is telling people that peristence works in Wikipedia, which is generally not true-- it's just a waste of editor time.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 06:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Using the search tool, I only found either ChemSep's own website or download sites. I also don't believe that this meets WP:GNG. JumpiMaus (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nothing suggesting better of the notability improvements. SwisterTwister talk 04:52, 28 April 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.