Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PyGoWave


 * 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. JForget 00:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

PyGoWave

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article does not indicate any notability of the software and reads like a description better suited to the project's own website rather than Wikipedia. Speedy was declined on the grounds that it is not blatant advertising, and the PROD was contested on the grounds that "This needs to be there because of being only viable alternative to the open-source future of the web." &clubs;   Ameliorate!  08:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: As it stands now, the article may not be blatant advertising, but it is certainly stroking this area, since it would appear that the article itself is simply a copy off a description page from their own website (e.g. notice the lack of Wikilinks). In addition, the argument that Wikipedia must have this article is flawed too.  Not until this piece of software becomes a noticeable alternative to the current Google Wave server can its article be justified.  And as of right now, it is not even public yet.  And I see no Third Party sources describing this software just yet. --Svippong 09:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 11:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP: It may need to be cut down/altered to fit into Wikipedia, but it is important for various Wave servers, not just googles, to be listed. Pygo, specifically, implements an open and documented client/sever protocol...something google has not got. For developers working on making clients from scratch, its not only an "alternative" its our only realistic option. -ThomasWrobel(13:42, 27 Oct (GMT)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.163.17.125 (talk)
 * Note that your reasoning should be based on Wikipedia policy, in this case WP:N and/or WP:IAR. --Cyber cobra (talk) 23:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't find any reliable source coverage beyond the Mashable story; at least 2 reliable pieces of coverage are required by the notability guideline. --Cyber cobra (talk) 23:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Wave is going to be the next buzzword for throwaway projects isn't it? Miami33139 (talk) 20:18, 29 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.