Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FrameBuffer UI

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. Ignored Greenman's non-commented vote. Fritzpoll (talk) 08:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FrameBuffer UI[edit]

Procedural nom for IP editor: rationale from talk page: i nominated this article for deletion, there is very little information on this software on the web, and no relevant references. all of the references point to pages created by the developer of the software, and therefore it doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, and is probably just self promotion. No opinion myself, due to my lack of knowledge of this subject area. ascidian | talk-to-me 22:33, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Greenman (talk) 23:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment - Would you care to expand on that? Saying "keep" with no rationale is the equivalent of "no comment". -- Whpq (talk) 16:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete the rationale for deleting is this, there are no links to reputable sources, just a freshmeat and a sourceforge page, both of which are assumed to be user created. If there was some writeup on it in a linux magazine or the like, then sweet as, keep. Another point to make is that this article seems to have been around for a while, and had plenty of edits, yet no references at all.119.224.40.127 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Self promotion, no independant sources Rotovia (talk) 00:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:20, 1 June 2009 (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.