Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ExamDiff

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Borderline, but a good rewrite followed the VfD. --Tony Sidaway^Talk 22:26, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ExamDiff

Commercial advertisement. See also ExamDiff Pro. Quuxplusone 18:17, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I can assure you that this is not a commercial advertisement any more than half the pages in Category:Windows software are commercial advertisements. As the creator of this page, I'm not sure if I can vote, but if I can: Keep -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 18:29, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per Quuxplusone. Commercial advert. -Soltak 18:49, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

But ExamDiff is a freeware program! -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

It's still an advert. In any event, since you're so defensive of something that you created and wrote an article about, I'd call it vanity; also a criterion for deletion. -Soltak 21:05, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Advertisement, regardless if it is free. — Linnwood ^(talk) 23:35, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
• Listen, when I wrote the ExamDiff and ExamDiff Pro articles I was new to Wikipedia, and I didn't know what a proper software-related article is supposed to look like. Can you guys give me a couple of days so that I can Rewrite these articles to look more like this? -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 01:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

OK, I completely redid the article. Is it better now? (before)(after)-- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 04:41, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

• Comment It appears to be look very nice now, but I'm unsure of the advertising issue - we really ought to only have programs so well known that our contribution to their promotion is negligible, and I'm not convinced that's true here. If that criteria can be met, I'd change my vote to keep, but until, then, I'm leaning on the side of delete. However, no offical vote as yet. JesseW 05:00, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.