Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ITimeSheet


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:35, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

ITimeSheet

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Advertising for non-notable timesheet telephone app. Google News Search finds no sources for this other than brief reviews that confirm it exists, such as a listing on "Hottest Trends for 2011". Article contains no information other than a features list and suggestions as to where you can buy this. No suggestion that this phone app has had significant effects on history, culture, or technology. Article was created by a single purpose account sharing a name with the publisher. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 21:34, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.
 * Delete Article makes no claim regarding its significance and I was unable to find any sources that it is an app that has had significant, secondary source coverage. Jay  Σεβαστός discuss  12:54, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I noticed that Maury Markowitz said in an edit summary "widely covered in multiple mainstream mac sources, including Macworld". If somebody is able to point me in that direction, then I'm more than happy to move across to keep, but so far the only MacWorld mention I could find was a product page which doesn't do anything in the way of validating its significance (not that it necessarily should); besides, I suspect that most apps have similar pages, and not all apps merit an article here - only if they stand in their own right. Perhaps it's coverage in the printed magazine that we're talking about here: I'm not subscribed and so can't comment on that itself. Jay  Σεβαστός discuss  14:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Not sure that everything ever covered in Macworld becomes notable by that fact alone.  But he did say that it had been covered in multiple sources, which is why I as the prod tagger waited for a while before moving this to the next level.  If this has that kind of coverage I am not finding it. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 22:43, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well of course not. But so far have not seen either the MacWorld source to judge that, or any other source of significance. So far I'm saying delete. Jay  Σεβαστός discuss  23:52, 5 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I can find no significant coverage in reliable sources. Aside from the minor mention in the Hottest Trends for 2011 mentioned above, it gets another razor thin mention here.  With respect to MacWorld, the listing I found specdifically states "We would love to review every app, but with 295260 iPhone apps we haven't reviewed iTimeSheet yet." so it would seem that any claims of being reviewed by Mac World should be treated with some skepticism.  -- Whpq (talk) 14:40, 7 March 2011 (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.