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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 08:31, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VisualFlow

VisualFlow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable media viewer software, without any references or any third-party media coverage. GreyCat (talk) 10:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge: to VAIO. Joe Chill (talk) 13:31, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete without prejudice to a mention being recreated in VAIO. Miami33139 (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This software is notable as it is a part of widespread VAIO operating systems and has historical relevance--Jemesouviens32 (talk) 14:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • VAIO is not an operating system, it's a brand. While VAIO is notable, it does not mean that anything related to VAIO is notable. For example, we don't have separate articles for every VAIO-branded accessory. We have a good criteria of notability: neutral third-party publications on the subject. I found none about VisualFlow — so I suppose that it's not notable. --GreyCat (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As per nomination.Bluehotel (talk) 07:19, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep with consideration towards merging to VAIO. --Tothwolf (talk) 11:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Couldn't you provide some arguments for your vote, please? "Wikipedia decisions are not made by popular vote, but rather through discussions", see WP:VOTE. --GreyCat (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Significant coverage [1] [2] (for starters) and AfD is not for cleanup. I happen to be quite familiar with WP:VOTE. Any particular reason you singled out my !vote? --Tothwolf (talk) 17:17, 23 October 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.