Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Codeforces (2nd nomination)

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. A third relist usually isn't acceptable, and this is an already an old discussion. If anyone would like me to reverse the close, I will, but (including nomination), keep-delete votes are split. No consensus appears to be the best option. (non-admin closure) Redditaddict69 ^(talk) ^(contribs) 00:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Codeforces

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Some new references, but still fails WP:GNG. wumbolo ^^^ 16:09, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As you can see at Competitive programming Codeforces is one of the most used websites for competitive programming contests and training and there are a lot of similar websites which have way lower website traffic and have their own wikipedia article such as CodeChef, SPOJ, Topcoder, HackerEarth or UVa Online Judge. Jahoda97 (talk) 9:45, 12 October 2018 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Jahoda97 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:03, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:32, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Along with the above rational, I would add that Google News shows enough sources that confirms the software to be notable. Rzvas (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is a lack of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Most of the sources found are primary. Flooded with them hundreds 15:47, 4 November 2018 (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.