Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palm Bible Plus

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. After two relists and no discussion for over a week, and none further expected. (non-admin closure) — fortunavelut luna 14:12, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Palm Bible Plus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Unreferenced for a decade, and I can't find any references. Fails notability criteria. Original author says "I agree that this can be deleted". Hirsutism (talk) 19:54, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bible-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Only RSs I found so far are review and one short news item on Czech media portal mobil.idnes.cz (called palmare.cz back then): [1] (2002), [2] (2003). Interesting to note, Czech Republic is one of the least religous countries in the world. Finding such coverage in their media shows BibleReader/PalmBiblePlus was important application for Palm platform. However, I don´t think the article is keepable without more sources. Pavlor (talk) 07:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another source - review on mobiletechreview.com (I don´t know this page, but may be RS) [3] (2003). If this is RS, I would lean to keep. Pavlor (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another (Czech...) source - big four page review on palmhelp.cz (community help page, which accepts articles from members, but has also its own editing staff and article in question was written by editor in chief; hard to judge as reliable source, but it is not a mere blog): [4] Pavlor (talk) 09:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep There are sources with broad coverage of this application. However, I´m not sure about reliability of some of them (mobiletechreview.com, palmhelp.cz) - my "keep" would be strong otherwise. I will try to rewrite the article with the help of the sources listed above, probably not before the end of this week. Pavlor (talk) 19:04, 11 July 2017 (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.