Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Software

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion and merging of articles related to Software. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Software|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Software. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Software

Codar Africa

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

LLM-generated WP:ADMASQ for a Nigerian company that fails WP:NCORP. Sources are basically lightly rewritten press releases (, , ) or literal paid placement (). A BEFORE search turns up only WP:CORPTRIV of similar (lack of) independence. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Suspected AI-generated articles, and Nigeria. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Artificial intelligence, Computing, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:13, 21 September 2026 (UTC)reply

The page looks good and is properly citated ~2026-50938-32 (talk) 08:46, 21 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Delete – Seems likely LLM-generated (see original diff). Independently of the current content, the coverage in The Guardian seems okay, but I don't see sufficient coverage to meet WP:NCORP. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 20:41, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

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 speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 17:56, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Borg (cluster manager)

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

I propose merging to Kubernetes because this article is a dictionary entry at best and certainly doesn't demonstrate WP:GNG. Even if notability was established, this article is not enough, and wouldn't even be enough information for a lead. WikipediholicRat (talk) 20:51, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, Internet, and Software. WikipediholicRat (talk) 20:51, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep – Seems fine to me, and a quick search suggests that sources likely exist to meet WP:GNG. Here's some example coverage:
- Metz, Cade (2013-03-05). "Return of the Borg: How Twitter Rebuilt Google's Secret Weapon". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 2026-09-23.
- Carrión, Carmen (2022-12-15). "Kubernetes Scheduling: Taxonomy, Ongoing Issues and Challenges". ACM Computing Surveys. 55 (7). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery: 138:1–138:37. doi:10.1145/3539606. ISSN 0360-0300.
- Clark, Jack (2013-11-04). "IT'S ALIVE! IT'S ALIVE! Google's secretive Omega tech just like LIVING thing". The Register. Retrieved 2026-09-23.
- Sharwood, Simon (2020-04-29). "Google reveals how its Borg clusters have evolved yet still only use about 60 percent of resources (Alibaba might do better)". The Register. Retrieved 2026-09-23.

I also see other non-independent SIGCOV to fill out a larger article e.g. . Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 04:48, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

I don't know how I missed that. Consider the AfD withdrawn. WikipediholicRat (talk) 16:20, 23 September 2026 (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.

Tablature editor

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

Note: This formal merge proposal was incorrectly opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:Scorewriter § Proposed merge of Tablature editor into Scorewriter

– FaviFake (talk) 18:53, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

I propose merging Tablature editor into Scorewriter. The article has been unreferenced since April 2025, and searches of the web, news and book sources turned up no independent reliable coverage of tablature editors as a distinct topic, only vendor pages.Its History section rests solely on the program author's own GitHub page. Tablature support is already treated as a feature of scorewriters in Comparison of scorewriters, so a short sentence or section here would cover it. Balabush (talk) 17:45, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Software-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:59, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Twimight

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

Twitter client with a "disaster mode" feature. The feature could have some notability, but the client itself likely not. IgelRM (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. IgelRM (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Scott Logic

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

Ordinary company with WP:ORGTRIV coverage. MitYehor📘^^talk 09:07, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Software, and United Kingdom. MitYehor📘^^talk 09:07, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete - Fails WP:NCORP. The sources are routine or incidental corporate coverage only. SOFILUIZA // COMMS 14:17, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of England-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete Regular, non-notable company sources: personnel changes, opening branches. Just things a regular company does. Lamona (talk) 01:07, 20 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete - Decently clear failure of WP:NCORP. Non-notable. WikipediholicRat (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete non-notable company. --~2026-50812-63 (talk) 01:45, 21 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete No coverage in independent reliable sources that would establish WP:N.--Leuvraethi mer Dorus (talk) 08:07, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Small Improvements

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

Mildly promotional page for a non-notable software company. Sources are limited to the company's own websites, slide decks and videos; brief mentions in database pages listing similar companies; WP:CORPTRIV coverage and sources that don't mention the company. I don't see any evidence of the WP:CORPDEPTH coverage necessary to pass WP:NCORP. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:22, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Germany. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:22, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete - Fails WP:NCORP. SOFILUIZA // COMMS 14:40, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete - It was notable for a brief peiod of time for about a year, then there's just.... no in-depth news anymore. Too many trivial mentions since early 2016 ~ Elisapoly (talk) 18:21, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete - we are not CrunchBase. This uses Vimeo as a source. They're not even trying anymore to spam us. Bearian (talk) 20:16, 22 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Intrahealth Systems Limited

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

The coverage lists awards and routine announcements, which is trivial. Not seeing depth of coverage. Hitaki-oro · 🈳🉐 23:28, 16 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Software, and New Zealand. Hitaki-oro · 🈳🉐 23:28, 16 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Delete — per nom. Looked through the sources and it is contracts and product launches all the way down, with nothing close to SIGCOV anywhere. EmilyR34 (talk) 04:59, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Seamfix

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:NCORP. The coverage is funding announcements, partnership notices and anniversary pieces. Kqol • talk 22:48, 15 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Software, and Nigeria. Kqol • talk 22:48, 15 September 2026 (UTC)reply

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Keep – I strongly believe Seamfix meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines WP:GNG and WP:ORG for the following reasons:

Seamfix has won the biggest technology awards in Nigeria ten times within six years. More importantly, the company solved a major crisis that plagued Nigeria's telecommunications sector, MTN $5.2 billion fine, a topic that generated national and international discourse. The company subsequently expanded this solution across the rest of Africa. It was also listed by the London Stock Exchange. This establishes both historical significance and widespread impact.

I started writing this article in 2020 and was only able to finish it in 2025. I am fully committed to improving the article, including removing any inappropriate language and external links. I will continue to add reliable, independent sources to meet Wikipedia's standards.

Given its direct impact on a critical industry, I am convinced this subject is more than notable enough to remain on Wikipedia. I respectfully ask the community to keep the article. MarkCarey911 (talk) 02:15, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply

@MarkCarey911, Seamfix isn't listed on the London Stock Exchange. It appeared in the LSEG "Companies to Inspire Africa 2019" report, which is a list. The awards are Nigeria Technology Awards and MTN's own supplier awards, and the rest is partnership and contract news. Which independent, secondary, reliable sources cover Seamfix in depth? Kqol • talk 21:19, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

@Kqol like I mentioned elsewhere, tech is a very unique sector, and we cannot compare the awards designed for that industry to the ones designed for the film and music industries. NiTA is the major and oldest one they have. The Guardian covers a bit about Seamfix here. Again, all I'm asking is, let the page be kept and improved. Thank you. Cheers MarkCarey911 (talk) 02:17, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

That item has no journalist behind it: the byline is "By: Guardian Nigeria", it walks through the company's own milestones and quotes nobody but the CEO. 21:02, 22 September 2026 (UTC) Kqol • talk 21:02, 22 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For input that does not read as if it were generated by an LLM, please.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Xentral ERP Software

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

Mildly promotional page for a non-notable German private software company. None of the coverage qualifies for WP:CORPDEPTH. It's all WP:CORPTRIV (capital raises and the like), press-release-based non-independent coverage, trivial mentions, database and user-generated sources and the like. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:18, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Germany. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:18, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I am skeptical about this reasoning due to comparison with direct competitors’ software, whose criteria can qualify an entry as well, since in the end their particular product is what readers ask about. Say Microsoft Dynamics 365, Odoo, and SAP S/4HANA, which exists in addition to SAP, that reads a lot like a list of WP:CORPTRIV: yet what would one want to know about the company? It would be unfortunate to have only one but not the other or have none. Consider the bias in that coverage of private companies unsurprisingly ends up letting them up appear more private while public companies generate a lot of noise for the finance press. There is a clearly a large audience on the customer side in the field taking note (WP:AUD), and it is good to have this quick overview on a serious competitor. (I have no relations to any of the companies, but I know that the internals of any company or government authority can rest on either.) Fay Freak (talk) 00:10, 15 September 2026 (UTC)reply
It is natural that very large enterprise software providers like Microsoft and SAP would have more qualifying coverage than much smaller market participants. Quick overview on a serious competitor is not part of the notability guidelines for corporations. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:34, 15 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep. refs in the article are weak, agreed, but once you look past the funding rounds there's quite a bit
Der Spiegel's business magazine, long investigative piece and not a friendly one, customers down from about 1800 to 1500 since early 2024, three of their own listed reference clients (KoRo, More Nutrition, Air Up) no longer using it, revenue around 16m euros a few million under target, and it calls them "a classic example of overfunding". honestly that one alone does most of the work, it's independent, in depth and entirely about xentral

FAZ story is independent as it delivers its own narrative and analysis, opens with Sequoia once funding the first Mac and says observers find it odd that a top US fund is backing a company in a crowded market like ERP. Also has stuff no press release had like the founders dropping the hardware side

B4B Schwaben, regional business site, not a reprint of anything. It gives facts none of the other articles have, local angle, team size, office, and it confirms the Christian Reber investment in 2020 before Sequoia came in

Handelsblatt calls them a mini-SAP for small business and explains in the journalist's own words why the founders built it. The story is told independently, not as a press release or funding announcement.

t3n, top independent German technology outlet. Asks why Xentral keeps getting compared to Celonis and SAP and gets into the customer side including the rough unpleasant parts.

Augsburger Allgemeine full company profile years after the last funding round, reporter's own photo and all

So six outlets over six years, national business press down to regional, all covering different things and not reprinting or merely rephrasing some routine WPTRADES. Put together they describe a business competitor to SAP that ran into real trouble in 2025. That's the depth WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:SIRS ask for. ArcticSnowWind (talk) 10:22, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Fay Freak your arguemnt made me want to check whether there was more to this than the funding-round coverage. thanks for inspiration ArcticSnowWind (talk) 10:30, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:40, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Keep Meets WP. The Spiegel business magazine article is an independent, in-depth source focused entirely on the company and provides substantial coverage, including critical reporting on its customers and revenue. This is sufficient to establish notability.--Leuvraethi mer Dorus (talk) 08:10, 23 September 2026 (UTC)reply

River (software)

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

No indication of notability. All sources in the article are primary or user-generated. (e.g. Arch Wiki, Codeberg) I also did a quick search and found only . ~ rusty ^meow ~ 14:21, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. ~ rusty ^meow ~ 14:21, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Software-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:44, 4 September 2026 (UTC)reply

*Delete Non-notable software that doesn't appear to pass WP:NPRODUCT. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:08, 11 September 2026 (UTC) — Blocked sockpuppet of PapaTakaro, see investigation. reply

Keep Found the second source from LinuxUser magazine. Kelob2678 (talk) 19:23, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 21:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Merge and redirect to Wayland (protocol)#Wayland compositors. There's not a lot of meat here to justify a standalone article. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep: The source provided by @Kelob2678 justifies it. Farhanansari1994 (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Merge to Wayland (protocol)#Wayland compositors. Even with the LinuxUser source, I don't think it meets WP:NPRODUCT. The useful information can be covered in the Wayland compositor section. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Weak keep otherwise merge per the above.

IndrasBet (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Keep per Kelob2678, the presence of coverage in LinuxUser establishes sufficient under WP:GNG and WP:SOFTWARE. Staticspector (talk) 23:57, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:42, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Merge to Wayland (protocol)#Wayland compositors. The sources are extremely limited. A report of a presentation at FOSDEM (Free and Open Source Software Developers’ European Meeting) and a very short description of a test in Linux User. GNG says "there is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." These two are insufficient (and this should also be meeting WP:NPRODUCT). Further, we must consider WP:PAGEDECIDE. As we have so little to say about this product, this is better contecualised on the proposed merge target. Everything we say can be covered there, and if better sources emerge, the subject can be spun out at that point. I know deletion is not for clean up, but we do not serve readers well by linking people to a page of further information, where the page contains no further information. A merge is not deletion. A merge is an editorial decision to cover the information on a relevant page that contextualises the information. That is appropriate in this case. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 05:55, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply
This is an open-source project, so while it is a product, it is not the kind of content for which WP:NPRODUCT was written. LinuxUser contains roughly 2,000 words on the subject, most of this is basically a manual, but this kind of coverage is not excluded when assessing notability. The length of content devoted to individual compositors at the target is a few sentences at best, here, we already have more and the article can be expanded. Kelob2678 (talk) 07:20, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Imaginando

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

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:ADMASQ. This article was erroneously moved from the draftspace by Katoya78 in 2024, mere days after an AfC reviewer had rejected it as non-notable, following previous similar rejections. The article lacks significant coverage of the company itself beyond an WP:INDISCRIMINATE recounting of its products and promotional history. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:41, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Companies, Technology, Software, Suspected AI-generated articles, and Portugal. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:41, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment The sources that may be about the company are paywalled, so it is hard to evaluate them. The reviewer declined the draft because of the product section, but I would say it is quite strong as the products are covered by the third-party outlets (unsure about reliability, however), so in principle, one can argue for the notability of the products based on the reviews. Draftification is fine, but the article is too old, so I am leaning toward deletion. Wikipedia.gptzero.me says that the page is human-written with 100% probability. Kelob2678 (talk) 09:27, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply
I was able to reach a few of the product article and there was some substantial coverage. What I can't verify are how independent the tech magazines are that feature them. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 19:00, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🦅White-tailed eagle^{Talk to the eagle}Stalking eagle 20:51, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Weak keep I think it scrapes past WP:NCORP. Pollia (talk) 19:41, 14 September 2026 (UTC)reply
In what regard? The bare minimum should not be enough to justify its existence without any substantial coverage or evidence, which this article is severely lacking. Most of the article reads like a collection of trivial material, editorialized statements, and over-glorified facts to promote the company and its products, none of which are notable on their own and would be WP:INHERITED notability, which is not how notability is determined for related topics. Nothing demonstrates that the company itself yields any notability independent of its products being made from some notable systems. It all around reads like a press release. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 19:51, 14 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:37, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Weak keep. In my opinion, we should only re-format the entire article. I agree it's not really that WP:NOTABLE, but I think keeping it will work. SH360! (Must edit! Must report!) 09:17, 19 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Keep. The company appears to have received coverage in third-party publications, including coverage of its products. The current article may need substantial cleanup, better sourcing, and removal of promotional material, but those are editorial issues. The absence of readily available English-language sources does not by itself establish that the company lacks notability, particularly for a Portuguese company where relevant coverage may be in Portuguese.--Leuvraethi mer Dorus (talk) 08:28, 21 September 2026 (UTC)reply

MonkeyJam

AfDs for this article:

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

Subject of this article does not meet WP:GNG. Previous nominator withdrew, before beginning a wikibreak; please read first nomination for more info. Ighs (talk) 16:05, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Software. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:17, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:50, 10 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Delete - Had the original nominator not withdrawn, this would have been deleted. Their source analysis checks out, time to get rid of this. Sycerion (talk) 08:23, 11 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:56, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Sinsy

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

Note: This formal merge proposal was incorrectly opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:Sinsy § Proposed merge

– FaviFake (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Proposed merge

This article has only three sources to demonstrate notability, and is nothing more than a description of the software and its history, with no 'reception' section or anything like it. It should be merged into Nagoya Institute of Technology under a "notable projects" section as this article is essentially a WP:PERMASTUB. In solidarity, PokemonPerson (talk) 01:59, 2 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 07:32, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:09, 3 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:28, 10 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Keep These two sources barely establish notability of the subject . Adding every notable project done by the faculty to the university page would be undue and, in general, unusual, so I am against a merge, stubs are not bad. Kelob2678 (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:45, 18 September 2026 (UTC)reply

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)