Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pinegrow

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. Enigma^msg 18:37, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinegrow[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)

Non-notable commercial software. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Creator AlanMattano has few edits outside this topic. MER-C 16:04, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: I'm Alan Mattanó, a new user and author of other deleted page as for example the Italian word "planata". This is my second fail making a contribution to Wikipedia. My position is neutral and no direct relationship with this software house. Pinegrow is new and a quality of note is that is one of the few text editors software review 4.5/5 that is making front to cloud web builders market domination. Growing in student popularity.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanMattano (talk • contribs) 02:53, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:17, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I notice that this page is essentially a redundant WP:CONTENTFORK of the draft article with the same title, Draft:Pinegrow. Unfortunately, it does not currently appear to meet criteria for inclusion at the moment. AlanMattano, please don't feel discouraged when I say this, since Wikipedia has very strict rules on inclusion. I think you've written a fairly good article given the available sources, but Wikipedia requires significant coverage in multiple reliable sources for an article to be considered. I'd recommend that you keep working on the draft until it's covered by one or two major magazine or news source, if you feel that it will be notable in the near future. Once it meets the coverage requirements, it would be easier to meet the verifiability for the content of the article.— Alpha3031 (t • c) 02:04, 9 August 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.