Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ATunes


 * 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   keep. NW ( Talk ) 23:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

ATunes

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable, no sources. Searches for sources do not reveal anything. atunes has a meaning in Spanish (tuna), so it takes some work to find that news articles are NOT about this software. Miami33139 (talk) 06:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - First stable release was last week. Until such time as there is independent coverage of the notability of this software, it fails notability requirements. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 06:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, regretfully. Note: This Google search is a bit more useful, and shows beta releases back to 2007, so "one week old" is misleading. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note to Miami33139 -- if you don't know how to search for sources on software, for God's sake don't nom articles just because you can't find anything. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't say "one week old" because OliverTwisted did. I did my homework to look for sources. Miami33139 (talk) 15:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Change to keep per Milowent's much better job than I did at finding sourcing.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No sources???: 2 minutes reveals: PCWorld, Appscout, cnet-featured freeware, softsea review. And I'm no techie. --Milowent (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Blogs and download directories are not sources. Miami33139 (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe not, but "Editorial Reviews" are. Also, some blogs, like TechCrunch, can indeed be treated as reliable sources in some cases.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree that PC World editorial reviews are evidence of notability. They have more than 8000 downloads with editorial reviews, which mostly consist of 2-3 paragraphs. It's an RS, but it doesn't contribute towards notability for me. This is not like they wrote an article about it. I don't think, outside the software category, that we would accept such reviews as notable either if ShovelWorld.com made 8000 two paragraph reviews of shovels, we would not create 8000 articles about shovels. Miami33139 (talk) 17:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's nice. Would you like to try an argument that's actually based in reality instead of supposition? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That is reality. If every minor review of every minor product was evidence that Wikipedia needed an article on the subject matter, we would have articles for every single restaurant that ever existed, every model of every TV in Consumer Reports, and every flavor of Rice-a-Roni. Three paragraphs by an intern at PC World does not equate to notability. Talk to me when Walt Mossberg reviews aTunes and I will agree that is notable. Miami33139 (talk) 18:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * At first there were "no sources," now the sources are no good? Aahhh, I'm falling into the credibility gap being created here. --Milowent (talk) 19:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Miami33139 I think the types of sources you are talking about are noted at N.--Otterathome (talk) 19:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Otter and Miami, I think you two could make beautiful music of deletion together. --Milowent (talk) 19:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources found by Milowent. -- Cycl o pia -  talk  18:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I never formally !voted above, but guess i should due to limited number of comments. --Milowent (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.