Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JModPlayer
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 --Bubba hotep 19:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] JModPlayer
Non-notable software, possible WP:COI. Leuko 17:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I fail to see how my entry is considered non-notable, if possible please suggest reasons as to why you have considered it as such. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nielt6 (talk • contribs).
- It is not notable because it does not WP:CITE any 3rd party WP:RS that give it non-trivial mentions (i.e. reviews of the software in a well-known computing magazine). Leuko 17:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- This software was just released recently, therefore it doesn't have any reviews by well known computing magazines. Not to mention that it is an opensourced project. Opensourced projects do not generally recieve magazine articles, nor software reviews. I have also noticed that CocoModX, another opensourced Mod Player, has an entrie (Actually a stub) despite it's lack of reviews. I fail to see the problem with mine. --Neilt6 17:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- See WP:NOT. Plus arguing that just because another article exists means this one should is not valid.TheRingess (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I still fail to see why it is mandatory for something to be popular before it can be entered in Wikipedia. Opensourced projects generally do not gain public interest very quickly, therefore since my page has been flagged for deletion so quickly based on it's lack of public mention I also fail to see how any other software project has ever recieved mention on Wikipedia. --Neilt6 18:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- See WP:NOT. Plus arguing that just because another article exists means this one should is not valid.TheRingess (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- This software was just released recently, therefore it doesn't have any reviews by well known computing magazines. Not to mention that it is an opensourced project. Opensourced projects do not generally recieve magazine articles, nor software reviews. I have also noticed that CocoModX, another opensourced Mod Player, has an entrie (Actually a stub) despite it's lack of reviews. I fail to see the problem with mine. --Neilt6 17:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- It is not notable because it does not WP:CITE any 3rd party WP:RS that give it non-trivial mentions (i.e. reviews of the software in a well-known computing magazine). Leuko 17:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as non notable. TheRingess (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Do Not Delete as software is too new for reviews to exist. --206.47.211.83 19:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Which is an invalid comment, since it violates the primary criterion of WP:N. Also, please don't vandalize other's comments. Leuko 19:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but can you provide me with any reviews for any of the other mod players on this site? Actually, no I'll re-praise that, any other open-sourced project on this site? I doubt if half of them have any mentions outside of Wikipedia and their project page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.47.211.83 (talk • contribs).
- Please see WP:ININ. Leuko 19:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- "Any other open-sourced project"? Gee, how about Linux, Firefox, MySQL, TeX, Java, PHP or Openoffice.org? Here is a lengthy list of reviews for Battle for Wesnoth (an open source strategy game) that includes some fairly notable reviewers like macworld.co.uk, and clearly demonstrates an international audience. Show us some sources like those have, and we'll gladly consider hosting an article about your product. Xtifr tälk 14:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but can you provide me with any reviews for any of the other mod players on this site? Actually, no I'll re-praise that, any other open-sourced project on this site? I doubt if half of them have any mentions outside of Wikipedia and their project page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.47.211.83 (talk • contribs).
- Which is an invalid comment, since it violates the primary criterion of WP:N. Also, please don't vandalize other's comments. Leuko 19:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per comments above by Nielt6: "just released", "doesn't have any reviews". Clearly not notable yet. —David Eppstein 06:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, clearly not notable, just released, not attributable/verifiable. Xtifr tälk 14:36, 1 April 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.
