Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L3 (text speech)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

L3 (text speech)

[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)

A completely unsourced definition of what appears to be a non-notable neologism. While I have no doubt that this shorthand has, indeed, been used before by somebody, there does not appear to be any significant coverage in reliable sources that actually indicates that this passes the WP:GNG. The article has been WP:PRODed a couple times, most recently by User:SimonP who gave the justification of "No content beyond dict def, no refs for a decade". However, the PROD was procedurally declined as it had already had a contested PROD over a decade back, meaning it needs to come to AFD. Rorshacma (talk) 18:55, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Technology. Rorshacma (talk) 18:55, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can find news coverage of "L3 Technologies" and something called "Widevine L3", but nothing about L3 as an initialism. According to the article, "there is no real way to identify its origins," nor does it appear that any independent sources have tried. Cnilep (talk) 01:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:48, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - When even the article indicates that there's no way to verify basic things about the subject it's a problem. Article fails WP:GNG and probably falls under WP:NEO too. It's been an article since 2011; it's had 11 years to generate coverage and for my part I can find nothing. - Aoidh (talk) 22:02, 18 September 2022 (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.