Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angelfish (software)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Impunity (talk | contribs) at 21:50, 17 June 2013 (→Angelfish (software)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Angelfish (software)

Angelfish (software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

no indication of WP:notability. Disputed prod. Since the prod, a couple of references have been added - A story about Google Urchin that mentions it as an alternative and a Spanish blog post. Google searches are not showing much better sources available. Some google groups coverage, some blog coverage and some directory type listings. No significant coverage in independent WP:reliable sources. noq (talk) 17:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Its not significant coverage - its just a quote from the company tagged on to a story about google urchin. noq (talk) 18:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the quantity but the quality of the sources. They need to show that it is WP:notable, not just that it exists. In this case, the sources are a story about something else which mentions this and has a quote from the company, a Spanish blog (blogs are not normally considered WP:reliable sources), and a link to the company's own website. noq (talk) 18:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What is the reason to keep it? noq (talk) 18:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And a quick question. What has prompted you and the previous "keep" editor to make your first edit here? noq (talk) 18:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Very "strange" that 2 new editors are the only votes for "keep". This should be looked into. Tyros1972 Talk 20:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 18:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Agree there's no reason to delete the article. Angelfish was developed by an ex-Urchin, ex-Google guy and it's a good thing for Urchin users to know about, since millions of them are now without an upgrade path otherwise. impunity 20:04, 17 June 2013 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]
Wikipedia is not meant to promote goods and services - they need to be notable first, not brought to notability by Wikipedia. And is there someone pointing to this discussion and asking you to come and !vote here? noq (talk) 19:21, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Just because it's made by an "ex Google employee" it does not mean it's made by "google'! There's not any RS on this. The software is not notable and the article is created to promote and advertise. But it looks like even the editors are misunderstanding this these days and if we are not careful wiki can be damaged. Tyros1972 Talk 20:02, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Bogus Voters impunity is the cofounder of Urchin Software Corp. (predecessor to Google Analytics). His vote is irreverent as he has a conflict of interest WP:CONFLICT. Ooniis the creator of the article, he also has a conflict of interest and his vote is irrelevant, and finally Hunter1081 & Nambrosch just happened to register today just to cast their "keep" vote. So far we have 2 Delete, the rest are either irrelevant or "questionable". I've asked someone to look into this. Tyros1972 Talk 20:32, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Just a mention for the new users here. The AfD is not a vote on if an article is kept. If your comment is not based in the guidelines of Wikipedia accompanied by a valid argument, then they will be ignored. There is no reason to have a bunch of accounts vote Keep unless they present a good argument based in the policy and guidelines of Wikipedia. Simple votes are ignored. User226 (talk) 21:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - While I don't mind being called "irreverent", I certainly have no conflict of interest, just a subject I'm interested in and where I have some domain expertise. Urchin was used by most large US web hosting companies and is now gone; this is a reasonable alternative for them and their millions of users. If you want to pretend Wikipedia is all pure and doesn't promote anything while being informative, be my guest, but there's no reason to be all prickly and pedantic about. User226 is correct that I don't know all the Wikipedia guidelines, and from this perspective, they seem pretty arbitrary. impunity 22:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Angelfish_(software)&oldid=560357658"