Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bip IRC Proxy


 * 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   no consensus. MuZemike 23:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Bip IRC Proxy

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not notable. Unsourced. Wikipedia is not a software directory. Miami33139 (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 00:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 00:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No sign anywhere this meets GNG, A search for any RS/sig coverage comes up empty.  Triplestop  x3  20:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per the clear lack of notability as evidenced by a complete lack of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications! JBsupreme (talk) 22:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 23:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge: This is part of Quiet_Internet_Pager from Quiet Internet Pager. Forums are located here, QIP Forums You will most likely need to use Google Translate to view it, but it is out there, and several articles reference this software including The Gameguard Wikipedia entry. --Apb91781 (talk) 07:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC) — Apb91781 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep and expand. Enough sources, actively used software, prominent in it's own category:. Nominator is not familiar with chat/messenger related topic and fails to provide compelling reasons for deletion. Wikipedia is not a thimble. 83.254.210.47 (talk) 10:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ...and so what makes you the expert? The basis for determining notability on Wikipedia is non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications (hint: BLOGS DON'T COUNT) -- this subject lacks said coverage hence the article can and should be deleted.  JBsupreme (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep on the basis of the Hartwell blog, if he is indeed an expert; otherwise merge as Apb suggests.    DGG ( talk ) 03:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep on IP comment basis, and fact that article shouldn't be nominated just because its unsourced. That doesn't mean unsourceable. --Milowent (talk) 04:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Comment I can find enough material to validate the features and functionality of the software so that the article would satisfy WP:V, however I am not able to find enough material outside of the Hartwell blog for the purposes of WP:N. My own preference for a short borderline stub article such as this would be to merge it into a larger Comparison or parent article, but as of this moment I'm not really sure that we have a proper target article where it could be merged. Two possible options would be Comparison of Internet Relay Chat bouncers or even possibly BNC (software). I'm thinking given some of the similar issues with regards to other IRC-bouncer software articles it may in fact be best to create a "Comparison of Internet Relay Chat bouncers" comparison article where these can be merged and redirected. The later "BNC (software)" article is probably best left as an overview of the subject of the concept of a network connection "bouncer". --Tothwolf (talk) 01:02, 6 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.