Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rekonq (2nd nomination)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2010 September 23.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 delete. Recreation of recently deleted article, no significant change in current status. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rekonq

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

fails WP:GNG; of the three sources, two are unreliable (a blog and a distro I've never heard of). When it is a standard browser, we can have an article. Ironholds (talk) 17:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article should be re-written when sources exist. Appearance in a distro does not confer inherited notability. Miami33139 (talk) 19:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appearance in one of the major distributions (Kubuntu) as the default browser is significant and notable. --Dchestnykh (talk) 21:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not (yet) notable. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2010 (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.