Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QTestLib

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 redirect to Qt (framework)--Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

QTestLib[edit]

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

does not meet WP:GNG, WP:N or any other notability guidelines. I saw a lot of blogs and manuals but no WP:RSes. Perhaps a merge to Qt would be appropriate. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:11, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 22:01, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^*poke* 03:16, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Qt (framework) - I don't see how such a narrow feature of a software project can be notable. If any content is worth merging, do so, but a redirect would probably be more valuable than outright deletion. Chris857 (talk) 21:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Qt (framework) - as above, no indication of notability apart from that related to Qt. Dialectric (talk) 12:33, 13 July 2013 (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.