Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SigmaXL
The Keep suggestions offer nothing of substance: The subject of the article may be "very well known" in a specific "community," such as computer programmers, but |this means nothing on its own. We need specific, third-party sources that support |notability; not opinions. Other suggestions to Keep only claim "there are sources out there" but, again, this on its own |simply won't do. Others offered the fact that prestigious and notable publishers "use" SigmaXL, but, again, this offers nothing in way of notability support: Where are the texts? The only offering of supporting sources came from  an Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:1D60:27AC:BD9C:2FDB:DDD7:B42F|ISP whose |only contribution has been to the article under consideration. In itself, this is, of course, not an issue, but the sources offered have, for better or worse, nothing more than passing mentions as part of lists (e.g. Tereza), name drops (e.g. Williams, Morgan), manuals (e.g. https://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&ai=DChcSEwjwx679g_nyAhUvgoMHHRcsAfAYABACGgJlZg&ae=2&sig=AOD64_3_e7w1ACR2PLOSEWp6i97aQfa5sw&q&adurl&ved=2ahUKEwiM2J39g_nyAhXDyqQKHQ3RCkoQ0Qx6BAgFEAE Bass), and so on. A gallant effort to invent notability, certainly, but Gertrude Stein|there's no there there
— User:The, 08:43, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:LOCALFAME||WP:N||WP:MUSTBESOURCES||WP:SPI (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)