Talk:RSSOwl

Untitled

 * RSSOwl - self promotional, yet another program Fuzheado 14:19, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Perhaps mention somewhere as an example RSS reader, but doesn't deserve its own article (yet). [Note: you forgot to put the VfD notice on. I've added it now.] - IMSoP 17:04, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Robert Happelberg 19:00, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep as stub. Anthony DiPierro 17:39, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: insignificant. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:52, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: just another RSS reader which is already listed as an external link on Really Simple Syndication. Not significant enough to warrant its own article. RedWolf 03:41, Feb 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: I don't agree it's self-promotional, but it shouldn't be in an article - maybe move to the dictionary?
 * Keep! I google for RSSOwl and get 3,700 hits. RSSOwl +java get 2,620 hits. Definitely significant enough to warrant its own article. BL 08:36, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
 * Agree with BL. It's verifiable and I see no reason to delete it. Angela. 21:25, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Edit and keep. Too much promotion at the moment. If we can find a way to tone it down, keeps only general info that matters, we can get a small stub. -- Bact 13:14, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Advert tag
This article makes little attempt to present the app in a neutral way. Were it not for the substandard grammar I'd suspect it of having been copied right off the website. Needs tidying. Chris Cunningham 20:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Currently the article is simple, brief and neutral. Google responds with 600 000 hits on RSSOwl, so it's definetely highly significant now. For my knowledge, RSSOwl is the only mature cross-platform RSS reader. For theese reasons, I removed the cleanup tag. --gerymate