Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CandyBar


 * 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. See WP:NPASR. Kurykh (talk) 00:55, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

CandyBar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Hardly notable, app was discontinued, and the article does not cite any sources whatsoever. And it also doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for products and services. Kamran Mackey (talk) 09:13, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:14, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:00, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Keep I added two new sources: Book with one page about this application and tutorial in Mac Life magazine (again 1 page). My search shows there may be more sources of this kind in Mac related media (eg. at least few articles/news in MacAddict, predecessor of Mac Life). Pavlor (talk) 10:52, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Added two more refrences (MacAddict and heise.de). Pavlor (talk) 18:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It still doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for products and services. That, and the article has almost no information whatsoever. Kamran Mackey (talk) 05:03, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Here I can´t agree. As of stub state of the article, there is still space for expansion. The very existence of CandyBar documents peculiarities of the Mac OS (macOS?), namely hard to change of some aspects of the visual settings ("themes"). After reading Mac related magazines I´m convinced CandyBar was The Application for change of default icons back in its time. At least in my point of view this is serious claim of notability. Pavlor (talk) 06:14, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, as long as it gets extended with more information, I guess the article can remain. Kamran Mackey (talk) 16:34, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  00:44, 2 March 2017 (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.