Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jini (IRC client)


 * 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.  Sandstein  19:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Jini (IRC client)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

DELETE. This is part of one of the most massive walled gardens I've come across in quite some time. Yes, this is yet another non-notable chat program. No, it does not have anything in the way of non-trivial coverage from reliable third parties. JBsupreme (talk) 07:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 23:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The burden is on the article creator to demonstrate the notability of the subject via references. Wikipedia is not a software directory and should not be used to expose/promote non-notable products. Miami33139 (talk) 00:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Durrrrrrr: Per Uncle G's comment on another of one of the IRC Client Bataan Death March AfDs of 2009, "the burden is on you, and everyone here at AFD, to look for sources yourself. Otherwise you have no way of knowing, and thus no real grounds for claiming, whether something is notable or not." --Milowent (talk) 01:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * From the Verification policy: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." and "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.'" This is a core policy. For those asking for deletion, it is nice and polite to show what effort has been to find searches, but it is not a requirement. Miami33139 (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Or you can try to use that little findsources template which someone conveniently linked above.  I'll do the work for you: News, Books, and Scholar = 0 hits.  ZERO.  JBsupreme (talk) 05:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge and Redirect to Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients. There is nothing in the current article that can't be covered by adding a few footnotes to some of the existing comparison tables. If the subject is later deemed to be notable enough for a standalone article and sufficient sources indicating notability can be located it can be improved and expanded at that time. --Tothwolf (talk) 05:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability is not asserted on the page, no significant coverage.  Triplestop  x3  17:23, 4 October 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.