Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fortora Fresh Finance


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 09:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Fortora Fresh Finance

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article lacks third party reliable sources and does not explain the importance or significance of the subject. Only independent source is a directory listing noq (talk) 01:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually the reference is not a directory listing, but an independent review from an About.com writer. I have added another reference, and expanded on the article a bit to explain the significance of the software. 01:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.18.82 (talk)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 00:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have added a third independent citation. Again, this is just an independent review. I had never heard of the product, and am not sure whether reviews are sufficient to confer notability, but that is the only sort of material likely to be published about such a product. Being included in a roundup such as the MacWorld listing may confer notability more than the single product reviews. At any rate, the original reasons for nomination have been addressed. - Fayenatic (talk) 13:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. Nothing here indicates that this personal finance software broke the kind of new ground that would give it significant effects on history, culture, or technology.  It's listed on a list of similar software at Macworld; other reviews are at "ITreviews" ("owned and operated by net communities")  and a review at about.com. I don't believe these things establish lasting encyclopedic significance. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:09, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The software is significant in that its data can be used interchangeably between Mac and Windows (Note: it is a native application on both platforms, not Java). The software was designed to be an alternative to complicated accounting software, allowing users to still manage their finances if they are computer novices, or cannot understand how to use other accounting software. This product is indeed just as notable as the many other software products listed on Wikipedia. It should not be penalized because it lacks the publicity or history of some other more well-known products. 17:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.112.240 (talk)
 * 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.