Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/APE Project

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 per lack of substantial coverage in reliable third-party sources. — TKD::Talk 02:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

APE Project[edit]

Delete nothing to indicate that this project or it's software is notable - no independent sources. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 05:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no notability asserted. Pyrrhus16 15:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 16:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --GreyCat (talk) 19:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Software is linked at Ajax Patterns (wich is a reference in HTTP Streaming) Psilya (talk) 20:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note from the original author. : The APE Project is still at the begining, but it already had real congratulations at French Open Source Conferences. Links have been made here and here for exemple.
- Another link here Psilya (talk) 21:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You can also find lots of links with the previous name of APE (previous name was ACE (Ajax Chat Engine)) : A blog explaining ACE BlogMarks Nexen DicoduNet Developpers Forum Psilya (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-- Sources found by Psilya meets our threshold for notability. --J.Mundo (talk) 18:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable, and the "sources" that the article creator has come up with seem to be largely blogs and forums, and hence NOT reliable sources. Mayalld (talk) 07:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If the project was notable, the article would have been written by someone else. Also, the failure of the author to provide reliable third-party sources. The links provided above are to blogs and forums, and are thus not reliable. -Atmoz (talk) 18:29, 27 January 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.