Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tab Mix Plus

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tab Mix Plus[edit]

Was nominated for deletion but reverted citing additional links for notability which is debatable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Varun21 (talk • contribs) 09:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not additional notability, simply two more refs which do nothing more than give the personal opinion of two internet writers. "Top 10 must-have Firefox extensions" and "Best Firefox extensions" are not notable achievements but columnists making lists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Varun21 (talk • contribs) 19 June 2009

Please back this statement up with policy. The general notability guideline specifically cites "published peer recognition" as one criteria to establish notability. Some subject-specific policies cite awards as evidence of notability. I don't think you have any basis to dismiss this categorization in notable publications. --Karnesky (talk) 12:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Step 2 of the AfD listing process was not completed properly. It has been fixed. KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pretty obviously notable: [1].. 185 news articles. Several books [2] Gigs (talk) 15:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Has multiple secondary sources that clearly state that it is an important Firefox extension. Fences&Windows 00:31, 20 June 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) 00:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per above: nominator, himself, cited articles that would support keeping this if policy was followed. --Karnesky (talk) 12:47, 26 June 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.