Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SASM

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) buidhe 04:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

SASM

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

SASM (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable personal project. No citations since article was created in 2012. Dgpop (talk) 18:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:33, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

• Comment Incorrect--there are two citations in the article, both to books that are reliable sources. Perhaps WP:BEFORE was not done here? Fixed, see below. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 19:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Thank you Mark–fixed above. This was a bad cut & paste on my part. One reference is a tutorial, one lightweight. That this software is actually used and notable remains to be seen. Dgpop (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, and fair enough--there may be some verifiable material, but the sources are not enough to establish notability by themselves. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 03:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

• Weak keep: Two book sources are cited, which is normally sufficient to pass WP:NSOFTWARE. The coverage in one of these seems quite short, but still relatively in-depth as opposed to a mere mention (as evidenced by its having a separate section). Modernponderer (talk) 12:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 02:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 06:34, 12 March 2020 (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.