Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GetFLV


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

GetFLV

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Piece of software with no news or other coverage in reliable, independent sources. Previously deleted as a blatant advertisement, the page serves only to mention and promote the software. Protonk (talk) 01:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 02:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete this version is a lot better than the one I speedy deleted, which was just a copy of the advertising spiel from their website, but the software is non-notable. There are a lot of listings on many software review sites, but I think the source of these is the company itself which is heavily promoting its product (e.g. there is a listing with a brief summary on CNET, a RS, by the byline is actually the company). Icewedge (talk) 02:15, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Software is not inherently notable, and product listings and capsule reviews don't count towards notability here any more than they do with self-published books and direct-to-DVD movies. Nothing here establishes this software as anything other than run of the mill or meets the notability guidelines at WP:N. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:51, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. While this would appear to be consumer software, there seems to be be next to no coverage in multiple reliable sources other than routine version announcements and blog reviews. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:15, 19 November 2009 (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.