Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FinanceToGo

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. - Mailer Diablo 05:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FinanceToGo

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

One of those tricky ones. A piece of shareware with a few reviews here and there, but no substantive coverage. The article doesn't make any claim of particular notability. Google returns 152 unique hits [1] a lot of which are blogs or mirrors of press releases. Notable or not? EliminatorJR ^Talk 23:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

• Weak Keep The notability is that unlike most software, this one uses the double entry system, which means it could be used for a business as well. I've never actually seen it, as I have never used a Mac, but it seems this article squeaks by. the_undertow ^talk 02:44, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep as well by virtue of by-the-skin-of-its-teeth notability. Ford MF 05:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep by virtue of reviews from Macworld ([2]) and Softpedia ([3]). EALacey 15:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep - it's been reviewed and it is somewhat notable. Goldenglove^{Contribs ·Talk} 17:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per the above comments, it squeaks by but is notable enough nonetheless. RFerreira 06:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Above is false - double entry bookkeeping is pretty standard. download.com 20 programs, sourceforge 34 programs, etc. I was not brave enough to try a Google search for "double entry". DewiMorgan 22:57, 18 May 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.