Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CFEclipse

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. Davewild (talk) 17:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CFEclipse

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

Standard searches did not reveal any substantial coverage of this product in reliable sources. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 19:50, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No significant coverage exists in reliable sources. The fact that a news search doesn't return a single result is especially telling. Winner 42 Talk to me!

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 02:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I could find no significant coverage in reliable sources. Such coverage as I could find is advertising, promotional or technical. In fact, the article itself is essentially advertising with help links. It could be viewed as a content fork of Eclipse (software). Any Wikipedia mention of this plug-in that is needed (and it would appear to be little, if any) could be done in that article. Donner60 (talk) 05:29, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looks promotional with no proper links.Arthistorian1977 (talk) 06:26, 27 July 2015 (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.