Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magican


 * 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. Lack of substantial 3rd party reliable sources, reviews in particular; Full reviews are the uusual way to document notability for consumer software.  DGG ( talk ) 10:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Magican

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable software. Prod contested by creator Gaijin42 (talk) 03:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Alessandra Napolitano (talk) 05:01, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't delete the title. I've not looked at the article and thus won't comment on it, but this is an easy typo and consequently a good redirect for Magician.  Nyttend (talk) 05:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Or to MagiCans. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not a typo of either, that is the actual name of the software. Voting on an AFD without reading the article is bad form. Gaijin42 (talk) 14:14, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not at all what I meant. I am not offering an opinion on whether this article should be kept or deleted.  I'm saying that "Magican" should not be a red link — if the article deserves to be deleted, we should recreate the title as a redirect to magician, because people who mean to type "magician" can easily make a typo and write "magican" by accident.  That's why I said "don't delete the title" instead of "keep", because the only thing that matters to me is the continued existence of a blue link at "magican".  Nyttend (talk) 03:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't delete the title. Since this is the first time we edit article on wikipedia and much place we need for improvment. But we have spent plenty of time to complete this article. So please keep it for us as we will try our best to improve it. any suggestion, please feel free to let us know. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmadesa (talk • contribs) 08:06, 6 December 2011 (UTC)  — Emmadesa (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Don't delete . By the way, please allow me to explain that Magican is the name of a software, and it is quite different from Magician. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmadesa (talk • contribs) 08:17, 6 December 2011 (UTC)  — Emmadesa (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment:Please do not vote twice. If you have to make a comment, please phrase it with "comment" rather than by stating again for it not to be deleted. As far as not deleting it goes, you have to show that Magican meets notability guidelines.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:29, 6 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79


 * Delete for lack of clear Notability. Is there any website that isn't magican.com that discusses this software? Any news outlets, web or otherwise, that review or discuss the software? If not, then we cannot keep this article. I also concur with Nyttend; the title may be a useful redirect to Magician, if consensus falls to deletion. I'd ask that the closing admin keep that as a suggested outcome, if and when. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, or convert to redirect for Magician. Not fussed either way. --Legis (talk - contribs) 08:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: For the title, "Magican" is the name of our software which definitely can not be changed. For other sources, we did offer the third web discussion of this software in the content of Comments from Major Sites, please take a check. And in the future, we will offer more discussion from other websites.


 * Delete, existence of the software on shareware sites is not evidence of notability. Σ Α Π Φ (Sapph) Talk 16:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment, additionally, persistent use of the first person plural indicate that editor may be in violation of WP:COI. Σ Α Π Φ (Sapph) Talk 16:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Do not delete Please kindly inform what kind of website could be the evidence of notability. Thanks. And for the "use of the first person plural", we will reedit to have it fixed. Please help to keep this article. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmadesa (talk • contribs) 03:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * comment Please read RS and Notability. Also, please note, you only get to vote once in a deletion discussion. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 03:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as lacking in-depth coverage in reliable, independent third-party sources. Should such sources be integrated into the article feel free to leave a note on my talk page and I'll take another look. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. If someone wants to redirect to Magician (as a misspelling) after the deletion, they are free to do that.  There is no need to have irrelevant junk in the edit history.   Sławomir Biały  (talk) 15:48, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please leave your comment after you have completely finished reading the article, as being mentioned several times,Magican is the name of a software, it has no relationship with Magician. I'm puzzled Why Magician is refereed repeatedly. By the way, even if you do not like this article,you can not address it to be JUNK. This is wikipedia, a Polite place.
 * 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.