Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CherryMusic


 * 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 delete. Michig (talk) 06:20, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

CherryMusic

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable software. No GHits other than blogs and promotional sites. No GNews hits. Declined prod. GregJackP  Boomer!   01:18, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep As of now, there are over 140 people on github, that have starred the project, which means that they look at source code changes and play a part in the developement of the software. Please bear in mind, that this software is directly meant for the end-user, in contrast to software libraries. A software library will have a much bigger audience on github, since github users are mostly programmers and software libraries are meant to be integrated into other projects. CherryMusic on the other hand is a stand-alone program meant for people not being able to program or that have only a basic technological knowledge. Therefore the userbase can be expected to be a multiple of this number, even though this is hard to prove. In the original reasoning for deleting this article, it was mentioned, that the software would not have enough google hits, but there are multiple entries for it on the first search page, even though there seem to be companies with the same name. Furthermore there are many independent sources meantioning it from different countries all over the world. E.g.: south korean, japanese, english, someone wrote a thorough documentation in the arch linux wiki. Moreover there are inependently created software packages for different linux distiributions, such as ubuntu, gentoo and arch linux Lillyb93 (talk) 15:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC) — Lillyb93 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep I also disagree with the removal of this article. The reason for removal were no Google hits? Since when does Google decide about the content of Wikipedia? Google's search engine is based on profiles, so it is commonly known that depending on their profile, users get different search results. I think it is bad practice to judge article notability by Google's search results. Anyway, I get several search results right on the first search page with google and with other search engines, too. There is also another reason why this software deserves it's own page: This software is notable, because it is the first of it's kind. There is no other software out there that has similar features. Being a server software with unique key features, it deserves it's own page. 178.5.215.123 (talk) 19:46, 12 August 2013 (UTC) — 178.5.215.123 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment - all of that is nice, but it does nothing to establish notability on Wiki. You need reliable, verifiable, and independent sources.  Note that blogs, forum posts, etc. are not considered reliable.  The reason for mentioning GHits is that reliable sources show up on a Google search - and none showed up here.   GregJackP   Boomer!   19:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: I found no notability per WP:N. What was mentioned above doesn't show notability. SL93 (talk) 19:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - No reliable refs to establish notability for this software. A search reveals blogs and download sites but no significant RS coverage. Page was created by an SPA as possibly promotional.Dialectric (talk) 11:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - No reliable sources out here. Zero news and book hits, all web hits are blogs or self published. The most prominent source is this one, whose opening gambit is : "Two of my best friends, Til and Tom, developed a music streaming server ...." Sorry, but anything your friends write about you is unreliable by definition. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   15:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as lacking in depth coverage in reliable sources as required by the WP:GNG. If such sources get added to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:07, 19 August 2013 (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.