Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Docusnap


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 15:48, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Docusnap

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * This is unreferenced advertising that has been created very suspiciously as a first article by . It was previously speedy deleted for advertising.  No references = no indication of significance and no indication that it is truthful.  Two new users also turned up: ( and ) and seem only interested in editing this article.  I suspect WP:SOCKING and WP:COI. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up download sites and developer's conference press releases, but no significant, independent WP:RS coverage of this software. Also possible promotional issues, per nom.Dialectric (talk) 19:47, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:47, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * QUESTION: what was the search string for that investigation? --Marcus Band (talk) 10:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I just wanted to write about a software that I use as a consultant for IT documentation. I found other products for the same usage here in Wikipedia: Whatsup Gold and MaSSHandra. They're linked from the wiki: Comparison_of_network_diagram_software. I don't understand why the docusnap article is marked for deletion, as the others are not. What do I have to add to make it better and useful for Wikipedia? --Marcus Band (talk) 08:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * By the way, everybody will write his first article here in Wikipedia. So this is my first one. --Marcus Band (talk) 09:46, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * The main issue here is that the references were nonexistent, and are still not sufficient to establish notability. New articles must be supported by "significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" - read WP:RS and WP:N. Press releases and company sites are not independent. The other refs are in German and while non-English sources are allowed, the lack of any significant coverage in English is an issue. The search I performed was 5 pages deep in google results for 'Docusnap'.Dialectric (talk) 13:27, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

I understand, thanks for the reply. --Marcus Band (talk) 13:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: no sufficient coverage in independent reliable sources. Phrase "this is my first article" is not an excuse for not following the rules. Please, make yourself comfortable with Wikipedia's rules and best practices, and please consider creating new articles via WP:AFC. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 11:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No, of course it's not an excuse for not following the rules. But this was not in my mind. I just wanted to say that it's a little bit difficult just to read that no notability was found, without the explanation how others were searching with what phrases. Google is not independent and it's a difference if you search in the US, in Britain or in Australia. You get other results. So for me as a newbie it's also important to understand how I can show notability. That was may intention. --Marcus Band (talk) 05:48, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I did my search using DuckDuckGo, which does not provide location-aware results. Please, be careful with wording: Google is independent; your concern is that it is not deterministic. Still, it does not strip reputable verifiable sources, so it is OK for the purpose of establishing notability. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 08:06, 26 May 2014 (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.