Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MIKE URBAN
when I first joined the wikipedia, in 2004, our deletion policy was very clear -- deletion was to be based on the '''notability of the topic'''.  By those rules, it would be largely irrelevant if the current version of the article seemed to be written by an SPA, provided there were valid references, out there, that supported the notability of the topic.  Personally, I still think following the advice of  is important.  I'm curious, and would like to know how many of the scholarly articles, written by independent third parties, that discuss the pros and cons of this package, in detail, our nominator reviewed.  I just checked.  I ''thought'' that we had a special purpose notability guideline, that dealt specifically with software.  I found an archived failed guideline, Wikipedia:Software notability.  So, what inclusion standards are we using here
— NONE, NONE
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)