Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auralia (Ear Training Software)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. The lack of discussion means that this is a no consensus close without prejudice against a speedy renomination, per WP:NOQUORUM. -- Lear's Fool 02:35, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Auralia (Ear Training Software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was a declined speedy, but I still have doubts about the notability of the subject and the language of the article. Related article bundled in - same concerns (but not speedied.) Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 18:47, 21 February 2011 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related page because they seem to be closely related and have the same problems re promotional language/non-notability:[reply]
- Musition (Music Theory Software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Redirect to Sibelius Software, as the product is now sold by them and is mentioned in that article, and this article is just PR. Same applies to Musition. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- JN466 21:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- JN466 21:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- JN466 21:09, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 02:04, 9 March 2011 (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.