Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TMate

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:01, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TMate[edit]

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

I have tried GNews (2 mere mentions) and GBooks (used once as a manual without covering the program itself; other hits are again short mentions or unrelated), but was unable to find significant coverage in reliable independent sources, i.e. fails WP:GNG HyperGaruda (talk) 09:10, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 09:10, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My usual search for software info (name + "review") got nothing. This is more evidence that we need some better policies on what to do about software, especially newly issued software (which this probably was in November 2005 when this article was written). Most "hand-crafted" software dies a pretty quick death, but often get some "launch" notices. This is especially true today because of app stores and online sites that review everything that issues forth (often based on the app's own description). LaMona (talk) 18:42, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as none of this seems to better suggest better satisfying the software notability. SwisterTwister talk 19:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Could not establish notability or deorphan. ~Kvng (talk) 20:45, 17 January 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.