Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Starfish (Image Generation Application)

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.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  07:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Starfish (Image Generation Application)

Looks like a neat program, but can't see any way it even comes close to passing WP:SOFTWARE - official site looks to be a user's page on Comcast, and has a total of 16 hits, by its own counter... -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 06:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep - Or find somewhere to merge a mention to, this looks one hell of a background generator. Ace of Risk 16:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. One hell of a failure to be notable. Valrith 17:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep I am not the author of the software, but I think this deserves a mention on Wikipedia. Perhaps I should merge to, say, Digital art? Stalin.PoG 18:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. BlueValour 03:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Petros471 20:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Comment surely one item in a collection of more than 23000 cannot be notable simply because of its inclusion in such collection. Valrith 22:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
A quick guide to what I think about Debian popcon by_inst:
  • <5,000 - probably very important
  • 5,000-10,000 - likely to be at least somewhat important or popular
  • 10,000-20,000 - probably only marginally notable, maybe a list entry or merge candidate
  • >20,000 - probably nonnotable, or old version of something, or some other chaff.
Just a very very very rough breakdown. My point is, #9258 by install isn't that bad. If you peer down from the list, you still see articles for software that are worse than that, above 10,000 line, for example, DokuWiki and Axiom. Granted, it starts to get chaffy at this point... --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Comment - Forget the counter, the windows port page has probaly been kicked around due to going over bandwidth - the MacOS (original/author) and *nix/nux ports need to be considered too. If it can't stay here, suggest Transwiki to F/oss wikia. Ace of Risk 15:11, 24 August 2006 (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.