Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CadStd

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. --Coredesat 02:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CadStd

CadStd (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

No assertion of notability. Google brings up mostly free download sites. Contested prod. MER-C 01:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete. No assertion of notability = CSD A7.Simões (^talk/_contribs) 02:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC) Technicalities, technicalities. Delete per failing WP:SOFTWARE. Simões (^talk/_contribs) 03:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

CSD A7 only applies for people, bands, groups, clubs, websites and companies. MER-C 03:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I see your point, but is there a reason for the list being limited to these items? It seems arbitrarily restrictive. Simões (^talk/_contribs) 03:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as WP:SOFTWARE SkierRMH,09:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. - Mailer Diablo 12:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I can't find anything about this anywhere ST47Talk 12:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Do not delete I added references to two magazine articles (there are more elsewhere). This should fullfill the notability requirements. --ArcticTern 16:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — Just the fact that something got reviewed in amagazine does not necessarily make it notable. The article still reads too much like an ad. –- kungming·2 ^(Talk) 17:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. ReverendG 23:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

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.