Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FreeMind

FreeMind

Non-notable, no sources Boatsdesk (talk) 08:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Boatsdesk is a new editor. --Ronz (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Please do your homework and give arguments in support of your AfD request. Just pointing out that the article misses sources is not per se an argument to delete an entry (you should use the {{citations missing}} template instead). As for the ludicrous non-notability claim (here it comes again...), Freemind has an average of more than 5,000 downloads/day and a significant coverage in blogs and open source related sources. --DarTar (talk) 10:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I fail to see where downloads equals notability. Also, if there is such significant coverage in blogs, please incorporate it into the article. Boatsdesk (talk) 00:15, 31 January 2009 (UTC) [Edit: Also, I nominated for deletion because of Ronz' comment on the FreeMind discussion from Oct 08. Sorry, I'm new here and did not know about the Citation tag) Boatsdesk (talk) 00:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Downloads have been one of the criteria historically used to assess the popularity of software. Not that I like this particularly, but you would be expected to make some preliminary research before requesting an AfD. If it is the case that you are "new" here, may I ask why instead of improving the article, you registered to Wikipedia just to request the deletion of a stub as your very first edit? --DarTar (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Very active community on sourceforge.net, good example of successful OS software in my opinion. What is needed to improve the WP page? --Method1955 (talk) 17:44, 30 January 2009 (GMT+1)
- Note that Method1955 is a new editor --Ronz (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please note that Boatsdesk is a new editor, he requested a VfD as his first WIkipedia edit without even knowing, by his own admission, the guidelines relative to stubs--DarTar (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't illegal to be a new user. We all started there. Remember, please do not bite the newcomers. Ikluft (talk) 14:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or stub This is one of the annoying stub articles that attracts a great deal of spam, while never meeting WP:N criteria through multiple, independent sources. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for promotion of products and technologies. --Ronz (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was easily able to find references and added them to the article. This is my usual test on an AfD. If I can find acceptable refs, I add them and vote "keep". If I can't and it looks like it will never have any, I vote "delete". This one passes that test. Ikluft (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Ikluft (talk) 14:44, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Refs have been added and the download counter is high enough. --Nils Lindenberg (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that Nils Lindenberg is a new editor. --Ronz (talk) 17:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't edit much on en with my user name, but I have a lot of wp-experience (see my user-page at de). --134.76.2.28 (talk) 18:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some refs are available, there seems to be use for this program and thus at least some people using or willing to integrate it with their own software. --BenBE1987 (talk) 15:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that BenBE1987 has only one previous edit. --Ronz (talk) 17:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]