Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Truevision3D

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. Does not meet speedy deletion criteria, but I read the most detailed comment as an unstated delete, or at least as "I looked and failed to find evidence of notability", which comes to the same thing. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Truevision3D (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Not notable. There are no independent sources. Mdggdj (talk) 18:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete with literally 0 sources can't it meet speedy requirements?

Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 18:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I deproded the article in 2022 on procedural grounds (previous prod/deprod) with no opinion on notability. I didn't find any reliable sources about the article subject - few mentions only. If there are reviews in specialized press, I was not able to find these. As of speedy deletion, I don't think any of the ciriteria are useable here. Pavlor (talk) 08:59, 6 January 2023 (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.