Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keyboard Maestro (2nd nomination)

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. Nominator withdrawal due to concerns being addressed. (non-admin closure) Kirbanzo (talk) 17:38, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboard Maestro

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

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

Seems to be promotional due to it relying on primary sources. Fails WP:GNG due to the primary sources appearing to be too close to the subject, and thus being potentially unreliable. Kirbanzo (talk) 00:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed the previous AfD, GNG could be met if the news sources were more heavily relied upon than the ones that are problematic. Kirbanzo (talk) 01:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I continue to have no idea of your processes. I don't see what has changed from the previous AfD - the sources remain, and presumably there are others. If someone wishes to edit the article and increase reliance on those sources, by all means do that. It seems counter productive for me to do that as that would remain as a primary source, and similarly counter productive to delete the article before doing that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterNLewis (talk • contribs) 02:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (formerly Everymorning) talk 01:37, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As the previous nominator I accept that the references found in the last AfD, just over a year ago, are still valid. The current state of the article is no reason to delete the article, but are a reason to have the nominator rewrite the article based on those sources. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:44, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep (at least) Unlike some of his other work the Kissell ebook is self published ... I've added another cite ensuring both in archived in Wayback.Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:19, 18 September 2018 (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.