Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UltraPlayer

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:29, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UltraPlayer[edit]

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

he coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:20, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The coverage from around 15 years ago (generally mention in relation to media players such as Winamp) is enough to provide basic verification but I don't see sufficient depth to demonstrate notability whether by WP:NSOFT or WP:GNG. AllyD (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hard to find sources for this one (just at the end of the published magazines era): 1/3 page in Singaporean HWM magazine [1] and solid looking article on technet.idnes.cz (major Czech media portal): [2]. Beside these, only brief coverage like comparison of MP3 players on pcworld.cz (Czech version of PC World) [3] and some short news. Pavlor (talk) 15:02, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- A7 material and no sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:04, 2 July 2017 (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.