Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JmIrc

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. Cirt (talk) 12:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JmIrc[edit]

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

Delete. This software application is not notable in any way. An extensive Google News archive search will leads you to some discussion forums which are not indicators of notability nor are they acceptable as a reliable source. [1] JBsupreme (talk) 20:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All that I can find for significant coverage is this. Joe Chill (talk) 22:14, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 19:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 19:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
unimportant even with solid referencing, this is not a significant subject matter. Why should someone be reading about irc on their phone from an encyclopedia? SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
- To be fair, and I'm the nominator who thinks this should be deleted, I've read lots of Wikipedia articles from my mobile smartphone. This particular subject however is severely lacking in both the reliable sources and notability depts. JBsupreme (talk) 00:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, I've read wikipedia on my phone. re-parse my english. This is an "irc on the phone" midlet, which - this midlet - is not an important topic for all the reasons you just said. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
    - Hah. Fair enough then. JBsupreme (talk) 06:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 01:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as I've said on all these IRC client debates, in order to demonstrate notability the article must (a) have independent, reliable sources giving it significant attention, and (b) demonstrate that it is in some way more notable than run of the mill IRC software (see WP:MILL). Significant quality of (a) may satisfy (b). - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, without significant reliable source coverage, it can't be notable. Nyttend (talk) 03:51, 12 November 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.