Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BazQux Reader (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 delete. Tone 16:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BazQux Reader[edit]

[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)

Article fails WP:GNG, this feels like it's been placed in wikipedia to be WP:Promotional, when I did a google search I didn't see enough to pass general requirements. Govvy (talk) 11:02, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The same can be said for most articles linked through the 'News aggregators' category. 'Rojo.com'? 'Imooty.eu'? 'Prismatic'? I believe deleting all these would only make the category poor and less helpful for those looking for alternatives, rather than a meaningful source of notable information. Leaving the page would allow people to contribute and develop it with better sources as well. Eleman (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 11:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I was the nominator when a previous instance was deleted at AfD in December 2012. A subsequent instance was speedy-deleted G4/G11 in 2015. Immediately after the present instance was created, Lopifalko moved it to draft with the comment "Undersourced, incubate in draftspace" but the article creator moved it back into mainspace shortly afterwards, after adding a vendor blog reference and a mini-review from a DonationCoder forum posting. Neither of these is a WP:RS reference; nor are the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:ITSUSEFUL arguments above sustainable here. Taking a fresh look at this, I can find listings, inclusion in some alternatives-to lists, and some positive user experiences, but nothing to indicate the WP:NSOFT inclusion criteria are met. AllyD (talk) 07:06, 26 July 2020 (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.