Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blog Torrent (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:11, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Blog Torrent
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Blog Torrent is abandoned. Last relise of the software was 7 years ago and the website no longer contains the Blog Torrent software. In my opinion Blog Torrent is no longer notable. The artical did however survived a nomination for deletion in 2006: Runarb (talk) 10:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Runarb (talk) 10:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom, software is apparently defunct. No reliable 3rd party references to establish notability of this software. The 2006 AfD failed to turn up any reliable sources, and the article was apparently kept because requirements for sourcing were more leniently enforced at that time in wikipedia's history. Dialectric (talk) 00:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 12:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep If you !=voted "delete" because the site is now offline, or because it is "no longer notable," please go read WP:N, which says "Notability is not temporary: once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage." Please abandon the notion that we function as a directory of the best products currently for sale. Looking at Google Book Search for "blog torrent," there are some instances of coverage. See: ; there appears to be some coverage at  but it is in the nonviewable section. Google news archive has significant coverage at . There's more significant coverage  (in German) at . There's similar coverage (in French) at . There's similar coverage at . (caveat: Those with language skills should see if all three derive from a press release). I would not be adverse to merging it to BitTorrent (software) or the article comparing BitTorrent products. Edison (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks notability even by wikipedia's loose standards of notability--0pen$0urce (talk) 16:24, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, great job at research by, above. Notability does not go away once it's been established previously. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - An early source coverage is Los Angles Times December 20, 2004: "Downhill Battle, a Worcester, Mass.-based independent music group that has developed its own BitTorrent-based software called Blog Torrent, says the technology is much more than a tool for swapping copyrighted movies and software." Just before that was some decent coverage: InfoWorld Daily December 10, 2004. That was followed by a mention in Associatged Press June 28, 2005. After that the blog "Torrent Freak" came out, but that appears to be a different topic from Blog Torrent. Along with what Edison found, the topic appears to meet WP:GNG. Blog Torrent is abandoned, so using Wikipedia to promote the Blog Torrent isn't an issue and provides a good history reason to keep the article. I added the above links to the article talk page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:02, 30 October 2012 (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.