Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gear Player


 * 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) 11:58, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Gear Player

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tagged for notability since August. Prod tag removed without comment. —Swpbtalk 13:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Swpbtalk 13:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. —Swpbtalk 13:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 19:44, 6 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Judging by the references given, it is reasonable that someone may want to know what it is. Op47 (talk) 17:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Since this discussion has had to be relisted twice, you get a reply. The possibility of someone wanting to know about the subject is not a valid argument for retention. Like every other article, this article requires reliable sources that establish notability and allow for neutral coverage of the subject. That is not even remotely the case here. —Swpbtalk 13:30, 21 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking significant coverage in reliable sources. Sources are single-author blogs (noodlemac, tektoria.de) incidental mentions, (verge) or commercial/related to the developer. The only possible exception is the french-language macg.co article, which is more in depth, but still just covers this software in a few paragraphs as one of 3 similar packages. On its own, this is not sufficient to establish notability. Also, this article's creator and a major contributor are SPAs, so it is possibly promotional in nature.Dialectric (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:27, 15 November 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.