Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cutenews (2nd nomination)
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 keep. Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 11:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cutenews
This article was deleted per AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cutenews. However, most of the Delete votes were based on the fact that it was copyvio. The article has been recreated with different text, so it is speediable neither as a repost nor copyvio, and the article creator has contested its deletion. However, it doesn't meet WP:SOFTWARE and should be deleted. Herostratus 17:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, does not assert notability, does not meet WP:SOFTWARE . Demiurge 21:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete because the articles does not establish notability with respect to the WP:SOFTWARE criteria. JonHarder 22:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. No assertions of notability that are verified by reliable, third-party published sources. -- Satori Son 04:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, there are articles on the web talking about cutenews, US government, McAfee Siteadvisor Rickvdn 12:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment neither of those appear to be non-trivial references, as demanded by WP:SOFTWARE. Also one of the developers listed in the article is "Rickvdn", so WP:COI may apply. Demiurge 11:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment i have written the entire article completely neutral, didn't market it or whatsoever. I'm seeing myself more as an expert on the cutenews-area than a stakeholder, because my (Rickvdn) 'contributing' is moderating the support forum.Rickvdn 12:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment neither of those appear to be non-trivial references, as demanded by WP:SOFTWARE. Also one of the developers listed in the article is "Rickvdn", so WP:COI may apply. Demiurge 11:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - non-trivial, widely used piece of software as can be easily determined through high activity in forums (almost 80,000 posts total) and many mentions in blogs and forums (google e.g. "CuteNews is a"). WP:SOFTWARE is a guideline, and still in the proposal stage at that. We shouldn't delete articles about software which is clearly in wide use just because it may not have been picked up in a magazine yet.--Eloquence* 11:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Definitely more widely-used than other CMSes that get mentions/articles on Wikipedia. Also, like the guy before me said, WP:SOFTWARE is a proposed policy and isn't even in effect yet. ShadowMan1od 03:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Why delete an article on a piece of working software? Corporal Clegg 06:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep meh... piece of shit software... but apparently popular crap. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 09:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per Eloquence, with added consideration that WP:SOFTWARE is a guideline still in the proposal phases. RFerreira 02:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep This is definitely not trivial software - CuteNews is a highly popular freeware content management system and has a wide following. The page is just a mess and needs to be cleaned up.
- 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.
