Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CuteNews (3rd nomination)

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. Coredesat 03:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CuteNews

CuteNews (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article for a software program that is not sufficiently notable per WP:CORP. Specifically, this program has not “been the been the subject of coverage in secondary sources”, such sources being “reliable, and independent of the subject.”

This article was deleted at its first AfD nomination, but then kept at a second AfD discussion. I did not believe that second result was correct, but instead of a DRV review I decided to give the article time to improve, if possible. It has now been over a year and no substantive improvements have been made. In fact, the article still contains not one single third-party source, and I was unable to locate any reliable ones that provide non-trivial coverage of the subject. It is time for deletion again. — Satori Son 21:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I am a regualr user of CuteNews software. The project is just about dead. Not unique in having a flatfile database system. Hammer1980·^talk 21:54, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as above -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep It is notable enough to have an article here, plus there are much shorter software articles, and a lot of less famous CMSes with their article here, and CuteNews is quite famous. --escondites 05:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It may well be the other articles are not sufficiently notable per WP:CORP. Hammer1980·^talk 17:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete nn Mukadderat 22:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete nn, and probably won't be. Talked to the developer of cutenews, and the project seems to be dead/unactive. Although I've used this software myself, it doesn't meet notability guidelines. Alecwh 09:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, the script is still widely used and the article states that there ARE plans for future version + the forum post on the original website states that such version is in development, 1 year of no updates does not mean a project is dead 217.169.30.225 09:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC), 3 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment: But the dispositive issue is not whether the project is "active" or "dead", but whether the subject meets the notability requirements for inclusion set forth at WP:CORP. — Satori Son 17:13, 4 December 2007 (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.