Talk:Pix4D

Notability
I've added additional references (four in total) discussing Pix4D; if you want to check, please click on the external links for the books under Further reading, especially the first two. Also, I've moved the focus of this article away from the company and into the homonym software, so I think it should be judged by Notability (software). Lastly, if you check the article about a competing software (e.g., PhotoScan), you'll see it's not better referenced than the present article. Thanks for any feedback that you might have. fgnievinski (talk) 03:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , it looks a lot cleaner now. I'll accept it shortly. As for PhotoScan - that was a terrible article. I gutted about 3/4 of it for blatant promotion. As a general note, while it's often good to compare existing articles with drafts for formatting, reference types, etc, the fact that an article exists does not mean it should justify creating a similar article; every page must be judged on its own merits. You'll probably find that now PhotoScan is pretty similar to this one! Primefac (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! fgnievinski (talk) 19:57, 7 May 2017 (UTC)