Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NLite and vLite

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 Merged as per below. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 18:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NLite and vLite[edit]

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

Procedural nomination. I am cleaning up bits of an incomplete AFD nomination for a declined prod. The reason given in the prod was "Not notable and software is no longer maintained and caters to older versions of Windows server only", but it was declined in part due to the age of the article (see talk). Talk page comments suggest that a promotional tone may also be a concern, and a previous version of this article was deleted in a 2006 AFD. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. To repeat what I wrote on the talk page: This article is linked from a number of other articles, and GBooks[1] and GNews[2] do turn up a number of hits, suggesting that this software may have been notable in the past. It's also possible that there are better options than deletion, such as a redirect/merge to an article such as Removal of Internet Explorer. --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've merged the entire article's contents into Software remastering, along with many other remastering apps I encountered. -- Tom Jenkins ^(reply) 08:28, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposed solution is reasonable, but it's my understanding that articles aren't supposed to be turned into redirects during an AfD, if only for technical reasons. Please see WP:EDITATAFD. It may be necessary to restore the content of the article until the AfD discussion is closed. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I wasn't aware of this technicality, but I suppose I can call for the AfD to close since I was the one to initiate it? I created the initial request, and Squeamish Ossifrage completed the AfD process by creating this page. I hope things end here. -- Tom Jenkins ^(reply) 16:14, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call for closure. I requested the article be deleted (see talk page), and various users helped me initiate the AfD process accordingly. After merging the concered article into Software remastering, along with many other remastering apps, I am hereby requesting that this proposal be closed as "solved", since the entire content of the article has been preserved in the said new article. -- Tom Jenkins ^(reply) 16:18, 16 October 2012 (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.