Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 May 6
Vote was 8 to delete and 7 to keep, which is 'no consensus', so should have defaulted to keep. Unreferenced were removed prior to deletion which satisfied the nominator's criticism. Category exists for same topic, but now the references that were used for appearing on list and in category, no longer exist, since they were contained in the list. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 14:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
- Endorse. Wikipedia is not a democracy, but you know that. Further, I'm not sure what you are or are not counting among the !votes in the AfD, as I'm seeing very different numbers but most importantly, much better motivations on the deletion side. The key arguement is that the inclusion of something into this list is inherently subjective as an arguement could (and most likely would) arise if you started a discussion with a developer about whether his software was vaporware. The only way to make a list like this objective would be to call it "list of software which has been referred to as vaporware by the media" - and that's just a version of WP:WEASEL. [[::User:Usrnme h8er|Usrnme h8er]] ([[::User talk:Usrnme h8er|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Usrnme h8er|contribs]]) 15:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)