Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Folx

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Folx[edit]

[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)

notability per GNG not established, sources are self-published and primary. Ysangkok (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 21:56, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer for soft deletion: While this discussion appears to have no quorum, it is NOT eligible for soft deletion because it has been previously PROD'd (via summary). --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Logs: 2008-12 ✗ deleted

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio

10:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Of the 3 reference on the page - Reference 1 (as of today) is not a reference at all, it is a page of raw code! References 2 and 3 are primary self published as noted by the nominator, therefore I don't see GNG as being established in this case JW 1961 Talk 13:26, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find any substantial outside coverage that would justify inclusion. — Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:43, 16 August 2020 (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.