Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Find My

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. Tone 11:07, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Find My

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Find My (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Inclusion criteria not establish as per Wikipedia:Notability (software). Jason Quinn (talk) 05:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:56, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep The nomination's vague wave is unclear. This app is a merger of two apps which both have articles. It's going to be developed to add the features of Tile too. As iOS has over a billion users, notability is inevitable. I noticed it myself when upgrading to iOS 13. Andrew D. (talk) 06:39, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

*Delete:keep If an article is introduced like this in 2019 with sourcing like this it wastes everyone's time. Subject to solid Wikipedia:Verifiability if Apple has 'merged' Find My iPhone and Find My Friends to Find My I'd suggest we should be doing the same. The least painful may to do this to delete the current Find My; move save Find My iPhone to Find My iPhone leaving a redirect and adapting to incorpoate Find My the do a merge of Find My Friends into Find My]. ... Okay ... I'll volunteer (without totally committing due to my other RL and WP purposes) to do a quick and dirty brute force kludge of that but I'd prefer someone else volunteered and I would like someone to dig out independent references ... And I'd prefer to do one merge than two hence delete. And please consider to get up to WP:RS sources before dePRODing something PRODed by an administer of anyone likely on WP:NPP. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• Neither the prod nor this nomination mentioned reliable sources; they just made a vague wave at Wikipedia:Notability (software). That says right at the top, "Before nominating an unsourced article for deletion, make sure to verify that it is non-notable, not just missing citations". And it's just an essay and so is quite inadequate as a reason to unilaterally delete something. In this case, the nature of the topic means that we can be sure that there are plenty of sources out there; like Macworld, for example.

What's more, this software is used for a critical purpose; to locate lost family members or a lost phone. Such incidents are quite common and stressful. At such a time, a distraught person may come to Wikipedia for information about this as our content is increasingly delivered by household appliances such as smart speakers. We should therefore ensure that our information is comprehensive and covers all versions during this transition period. A "quick and dirty brute force kludge" is therefore not appropriate. We should develop this content in accordance with our policies including WP:ATD; WP:BITE; WP:IMPERFECT; WP:NOTPAPER; WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. (talk) 11:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

I have elected to switch to keep in the hope nom. {U|Jason Quinn}} will do a speedy keep as pragmatically there will be 3 pages here 2 of which will likely end up as redirects and merging is best concentrated on and discussed outside WP:AFD. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep. Wikipedia:Notability (software) is an essay that was never vetted by the community at large; it's not a guideline, and the applicable guideline in this case is WP:GNG. I've added 3 sources to the article, and there are now a total of 4 independent reliable sources that offer significant coverage of Find My:
  1. Cipriani, Jason (September 21, 2019). "Use the new Find My app to hunt down your friends and your iPhone". CNET. Retrieved 2019-10-10.
  2. Moren, Dan (September 8, 2019). "iOS 13 Find My App: How to Track Your iPhone or Friends". Tom's Guide. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  3. Evans, Jonny (21 June 2019). "How 'Find My' Mac works in macOS Catalina and iOS 13". Computerworld. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  4. Greenberg, Andy (June 5, 2019). "Apple's 'Find My' Feature Uses Some Very Clever Cryptography". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 2019-11-07.

The merge suggested by Djm-leighpark makes sense, but I think it would be easier for Find My iPhone and Find My Friends to be merged into Find My, than to delete this article, merge the other two, and then rename the resulting article to Find My again. — Newslinger talk 11:31, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• We shouldn't rush to merge because plenty of people are still on ios 12 and earlier versions and so might be confused by content about the new merged version, which has a different icon and interface. Andrew D. (talk) 11:41, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, there's no rush. We regularly retain articles about obsolete software, since notability is not temporary. — Newslinger talk 11:48, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

My comment about the article lacking notability had everything to do with lack of reliable sources and the articles lack of them. I see non-policy arguments above (like suggesting it's notable simply because it's part of a popular OS) and some unfair suggestions that my comment about notability didn't have anything to do with reliable sources when that's the very unpinning of what notability means here. If you wish to establish notability with reliable sources by all means do so but I see no compelling reason above to invoke Wikipedia:Ignore all rules here, which seems to be what's going on. Jason Quinn (talk) 13:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• I cited four policies and a guideline in my comment above. The nominations didn't cite any policies or guidelines; just an essay. See WP:POT and WP:SAUCE. Andrew D. (talk) 14:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• Comment: I've just noticed there move/merge history at Talk:Find My iPhone and a consensus at Talk:Find My iPhone. The following refs added to the article should demonstrate WP:GNG; this is mainstream core IOS stuff so its pretty visibile I guess.. Moran was definitely a hands on review; Holic maybe more form the press releasse; Greening is reporting after a demo.

References

Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:48, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep The nomination seems to lack a relevant rationale. The nominator points to WP:NSOFT as a rationale, however NSOFT is just an essay. In any event the app is quite notable. And we have actual policies that apply like GNG. There are perhaps a billion users?. Lightburst (talk) 15:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
• Merge Find My iPhone and Find My Friends into this article. Certainly not too long to consider together what Apple considers together once you apply WP:NOTCHANGELOG. Reywas92^Talk 06:33, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

• I'd respectfully comment that would mean raising a merge proposal per WP:PROMERGEWP:MERGEPROP due that discussion already having been made within the last month as mentioned above and it is inappropriate for WP:AFD to override such a discussion as merge like marriage should be acceptable to all parties. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:43, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

• Comment This is probably a case where addressing Consider improving the page to address the concerns raised. prior to dePROD especially where the PRODer can take you to WP:AFD is a better course of action unless one wants to make a WP:POINT.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:40, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
• Keep Newslinger and OlSaffriveons have made massive improvements to the article[1], proving it passes the general notability guidelines just fine. Dream Focus 10:15, 8 November 2019 (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.