Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lasso tool


 * 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 keep.  Sandstein  14:20, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Lasso tool

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No claims of notability. Out of three references one is Wikibooks and rest two are just mentions. &#8208;&#8208;1997kB (talk) 05:13, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep A universal part of nearly every image editing program. This is a definite WP:SOFIXIT case.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 05:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:59, 25 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, it's a widespread and important concept in its field. I've replaced the Wikibooks with a proper GIMP ref, but honestly, we could ref this to every graphics tool in existence. For example here it is in Paint Shop Pro. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – A well-known tool utilized by the vast majority of people who do photographs. To be honest, to post the references and cites regarding this application, as shown above, is only redundant. ShoesssS Talk 17:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Could benefit from some more references, but the concept is clearly notable. Brad  v  20:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree the concept is important enough to be covered on Wikipedia. That said, if there aren't several independent sources that can be found focusing in depth on the tool itself, I would think that a redirect to a subsection on a different topic might be appropriate. I'm torn, however, on what topic to recommend as a possible parent. 68.173.149.120 (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment – I would have no problems directing either to Photoshop or Corel (or any other photo software program). However, doing so in my opinion, would promote or give undue weight to that particular program.  As such, believe it should be a standalone article. ShoesssS Talk 18:32, 30 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Exactly: given that the tool is widespread, it would be inappropriate to force it into any particular corner. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:37, 30 May 2018 (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.