Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of GTD software


 * 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 - Even ignoring the apparent sock and/or meatpuppetry, the arguments in favor of keeping seemed to mostly boil down to WP:USEFUL. While there are other comparison lists of software, the problem is that hardly any of these seem to be notable.—Random832 20:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Comparison of GTD software

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Indiscriminate list. No clear basis for inclusion. Unsourced and presumably original research. onerous to maintain and doesn't appear to serve an encyclopaedic function. Spartaz Humbug! 23:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Seconded Shahar Goldin (talk) 08:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * keep looks encyclopedic and notable to me, just needs citations. improvement is not a reason for deletion unless it can't be improved.  here, all they need to do is cite the product descriptions. --Buridan (talk) 14:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, please keep it. I'm glad I found it, and will be happy to help improve it. But: I don't see why it's called GTD comparison. It should rather be called "time management software comparison". Implementation of GTD principles could be one parameter in the list, for those who care. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.77.119.127 (talk) 20:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * keep Please! Is very useful.  May not *yet* be encyclopedic, but is certainly a good start.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.221.14 (talk) 03:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * keep I was looking for "comparison of GTD software" and this article has made a start. It can also refer to this GTDSoftware list on another wiki. --sabre23t (talk) 07:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * keep There are plenty of comparison lists, software and otherwise on Wikipedia. Useful resource for especially for people just getting started with GTD and looking for tooling to support them. Could do with a tidy up tho... ShaneNZ (talk) 09:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * keep It's useful. Should be a candidate for improvement - not deletion. --neverflake


 * keep This article fulfills a function that no other location in the world even comes close to fulfilling. This is bar none the best list of GTD friendly software on the web. I'm certain a significant amount of traffic runs through this page. The content could be improved reasonably easily by adding a half dozen columns which identify critical components of the GTD system, (such as processing and "next steps") and then contacting the owners of each product and requesting that they update their row accordingly to indicate in each column the level of support their product has. Owners that don't update their row will be left with empty values in these columns, and then after a few weeks any product with these columns empty can be deleted. This quickly distributes the burden, adds more value to the article, and abbreviates the list. As for documentation, I think it's self documenting. Each row points to a web site where the product mentioned can be found, thereby documenting the assertions about the product.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.125.55 (talk) 07:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * keep Important resource, should be expanded. Many encyclopedic articles contain lists; it's the most effective way to communicate comparative information. Let's expand the article by adding a text discussion of general groups, methodologies, and philosophies employed by GTD-like software, including trends over time. Table should appear first for quick reference and summary. Add a timeline. I think it would be a mistake to add general time management software here. Create or link to a separate, parent article for that, because GTD-like software is a phenomenon in its own right that is receiving focused attention. Lumping everything together would make the article huge and hard to digest. Kcren 16:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:SOCK (see above). But actually because it's an indiscriminate list. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry 01:16, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Me and my 5 puppets say delete as a "bunch of software" list.  SkierRMH  ( talk ) 08:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete&mdash;I did a revision job on column 1 of the table that dominates this article so that I could see which applications had articles and which did not. Of those that do have articles, none of them mention GTD let alone being particularly useful for conducting formalized GTD.  This absence of mentions of the classification that holds this list article together is a hallmark of original research.  Regardless how utile the content is, being excluded from Wikipedia does not reduce its utility; it just means you need to find another place to host it. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 23:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions.   —User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 23:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Chase me ladies. -Carados 17:26, 3 December 2007 (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.