Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragon View (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. NJA (t/ c)  10:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Dragon View (software)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )



This appears to be WP:ARTSPAM. I wasn't able to find significant secondary coverage of this software. Google news is full of press releases about this, but only  appear to be independent of the subject, and mention it in a couple of senteces. Given that these are CPA-targeted publications, the coverage seems trivial. The wiki article is also full of references used for WP:Bombardment purposes that don't directly discuss this software, but only the use XBRL technology in SOX, SEC, etc. Pcap ping  15:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Update. This seems to be a long-term spam campaign conducted by the same user Special:Contributions/Niente21. Also nominating the following articles sharing the same problems: Pcap ping  16:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- Pcap  ping  15:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- Pcap  ping  15:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Clear Use of wikipedia as a vehicle for advertising and promotion for "Rivet Software" and related Products. References given do not appear to confer notability; Nothing more than Advertisements masquerading as articles.--Hu12 (talk) 16:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all as it's essentially indisputable that this is a case of Wikipedia being used as advertising. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all. References offered to the Dragon View article are press releases or government documents that nowhere mention the product.  The publisher, Rivet Software, presents a similar situation, being mentioned in passing only in an article about the format required of corporate filings to the SEC.  And let's face it: this is about a business that makes software to allow other businesses to format their data for filings required by the Securities and Exchange Commission.  This no doubt is a worthwhile and useful thing.  But any notability guideline that allowed in a commercial business of this sort as an encyclopedia subject would not be doing its job. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 20:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If this were software well-known for its use by accountants, e.g. QuickBooks, then it would warrant inclusion, but these products are hardly covered even in specialist venues. Pcap ping  21:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete all if Pcap doesn't seem to think it is notable I sure won't. I trust his assessment to lack of coverage (but not the reverse :)). Miami33139 (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've just been called a "reference nazi", so maybe you should trust me some more. Otherwise, what are you in that respect? ;-) Pcap ping  22:56, 12 January 2010 (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.