Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic pen (software)

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 deletion (WP:SNOW). -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Magic pen (software)[edit]

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

Deliberately created by someone at WP:NEWT for some sort of experiment. Speedy declined. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 04:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable software. I can't find any reliable sources that discuss this in any detail. Bfigura ^(talk) 05:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and if this was created to prove a point I'd admonish the user.--Crossmr (talk) 05:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources to indicate notability. --Cybercobra (talk) 05:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Related thread at ANI Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, admonish, and create a CSD category for software already Please? Miami33139 (talk) 06:44, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and agree totally with Miami. ╟─Treasury Tag►constabulary─╢ 08:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Comment; this is rubbish and I don't at all care that it's a test article, but for POV/COI issues I can't say any weight should be given to my opinion. A7 qualifies in this example because it is 100% web content and now a stand-alone piece of software, so even though the article was a trap on the technicality it was software wasn't researched by the author? ~~Great, author could fit into the NEWT investigation hunt... patrols that possibly don't research the subjects they mark for CSD and make a subjective decision. How does this not scare off patrols?~~ ...Scratch that. I entirely garbled together the 3 admins that have been around in this in some way and missed how this article played out. My fault, and sorry for any confusion. ♪ daTheisen (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 13:46, 15 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.