Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R2m

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

R2m

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

There is nothing to suggest that this is software meets the general notability guideline. (PROD was removed with no explanation, by creator). SmartSE (talk) 12:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Authors seem to be attempting to advertise their product (though the wording is not unambiguously promotional. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 12:57, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:10, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable software per nom. --Pnm (talk) 03:13, 13 February 2011 (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.