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 no consensus. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion besides the nominator but not enough keep !votes to establish a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MorphThing[edit]

MorphThing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Makes no claims to notability, and a search for sources from Google News show only trivial mentions in USAtoday, or 'puff pieces' written by the company themselves. Has no reliable sources, reads like a HOWTO piece. It is, however, a well-written article - just not notable. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep - sourcible as the nominator says. Could use a cleanup (WP:YOU issues was one that popped out). the "million morphs" created is arguably a somewhat weak assertion of notability. –xeno^talk 00:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:09, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:23, 20 June 2009 (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.