Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EasyBlog: Difference between revisions

EasyBlog (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Could not find any news sources. Most citations are from a primary source, a few are sourced to a Joomla extension directory, one is from a blog, and one is from a coupon site. GrinningIodize (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. GrinningIodize (talk) 21:00, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Basically the nominator is correct. The secondary sources are not remotely significant coverage, and no other sources exist.Cornerstone1949 (talk) 23:31, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Agree with nom. Also tried looking for sources, but don’t see much independent coverage. Asteramellus (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: lacks enough SIGCOV sources with the current citations, additional searches did not help either.Lorraine Crane (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not enough WP:SIGCOV Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:00, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — agree with the nom. Most citations are primary sources. EmilyR34 (talk) 07:51, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]