Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HotHTML
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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No notability established, no references or reliable sources provided. Vacuum Cleaner 01 10:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 14:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no sources or assertion of notability. /Blaxthos 15:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for lack of assertion of notability, and no reliable, independent sources provided. Someguy1221 03:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The article needs cleanup f'sure...but I don't like the precedent of deleting articles regarding software applications. There are lots of people who consult Wikipedia for feature comparison charts like this one, and this one, and it's not doing them any good at all to present them with a bunch of "oranged-out" dead links. In a day and age when mainstream media news agencies are being run by the corporate entertainment divisions, and a good 95% of technical information exchanges are occuring exclusively on internet fora, the hoary "notability" guidelines Wikipedia is presently employing are doing more harm than good -- you simply cannot expect newspapers and "big four" TV channels to write stories about such obscure technical subjects. This does not mean that nobody is interested in the material. I'd guess that about three-fourths of the "still alive because they're blue" linked applications on either of those comparison charts could be hosed under the same rationale as this one. But by deleting them, all you're doing is driving away readership segments and eliminating any positive reputation for comprehensiveness.--Mike18xx 00:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as not notable and unverifiable. There's nothing making this app stand out. Ichibani utc 03:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.