Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AutoScreen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Delete. Rjd0060 (talk) 17:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AutoScreen
Non-notable software product introduced by company in existence since Jan 2008. — ERcheck (talk) 03:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I believe it is indeed notable, as it is in fact the only automatic screenshot taker that can upload the screenshots to an FTP server and ImageShack... Haqrefpber (talk) 13:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Notability cannot be unilaterally claimed by a subject, it must be conferred by reliable, verifiable, and independent third-party sources. Such does not appear to be the case here. DarkAudit (talk) 13:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, well, going by that, then I guess you'll have to delete it. The only other third-party sources that can currently confirm this are the various download websites that the program is listed on (such as Download.com, Softpedia, VersionTracker, etc). The program certainly is not as well known as, say, SnagIt, but I believe it has features that make it notable. You might yourself verify this by doing a Google search for an automatic screenshot taker that can also upload to ImageShack and FTP. Haqrefpber (talk) 14:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Notability is established by Wikipedia:Notability, not personal opinion. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk
- Delete per nom and DarkAudit. Non-notable software. Google hits for "AutoScreen" too ambiguous. Hits for "AutoScreen+16 Software" are a mere 70, with about half of those being duplicate hits within the same site. Alexa rank is over 5 million (*yawn*). - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Last attempt: Google listing. Please show me any other program besides AutoScreen that is listed. Haqrefpber (talk) 14:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's even fewer results than my search! Last attempt: please read Wikipedia:Notability and explain why, according to these criteria, this software is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thanks. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- According to that page, 'Notability is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity", although these may positively correlate with it.' The point of the link was to show that there is no other automatic screenshot taker that can upload screenshots to FTP and ImageShack. I would consider this "worthy of notice". If download websites that contain the program are not good enough sources and do not provide the 'significant coverage' that you wish to have, then the article may be deleted until other third-party sources provide more information on the subject in question. Haqrefpber (talk) 14:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Now you're catching on! You can end this early by blanking the article completely, which will trigger a {{G7}} speedy deletion, ending the need for this discussion. If you want to. If you want to see how this plays out, then do nothing and watch this page to see how the consensus plays out. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think I'll leave it be, and see how it plays out. Thanks for letting me plead my case. Haqrefpber (talk) 15:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Now you're catching on! You can end this early by blanking the article completely, which will trigger a {{G7}} speedy deletion, ending the need for this discussion. If you want to. If you want to see how this plays out, then do nothing and watch this page to see how the consensus plays out. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- According to that page, 'Notability is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity", although these may positively correlate with it.' The point of the link was to show that there is no other automatic screenshot taker that can upload screenshots to FTP and ImageShack. I would consider this "worthy of notice". If download websites that contain the program are not good enough sources and do not provide the 'significant coverage' that you wish to have, then the article may be deleted until other third-party sources provide more information on the subject in question. Haqrefpber (talk) 14:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's even fewer results than my search! Last attempt: please read Wikipedia:Notability and explain why, according to these criteria, this software is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Thanks. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 22:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Unique is not notable. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:43, 18 May 2008 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
