Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tune Smithy


 * 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:13, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Tune Smithy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

How is this subject notable? Almost all of the Google search results link to pages that were created by the man who created this article. &#8213; Susmuffin Talk 22:07, 19 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment It was my first article and I was not aware of many of the Wikipedia guidelines. I have a declaration of interest on my user page here: User:Robertinventor. The reason I did not delete it was:
 * Review of Tune Smithy and the fractal tunes is the main focus in Sound on Sound printed magazine covering musicain's software and hardware.
 * Short Review of Bounce Metronome (scroll down a little) in Sound on Sound printed magazine
 * References to Tune Smithy in Tuning, timbre, spectrum, scale By William A. Sethares
 * For more academic cites: 17 cites of "Tune Smithy" and 3 cites of "Bounce Metronome" in Google Scholar
 * Please take these into consideration and decide accordingly. Robert Walker (talk) 23:12, 19 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete G11, promo for Robert's not-free software No editors have contributed text or sources beyond the most basic of copyediting. Robert's sources above are product reviews (see WP:SPIP), and nobody cares about the WP:GOOGLETEST.  On the day of article creation, Robert also created a user page in which he proudly proclaimed that Tune Smithy was his best selling software.  This is part of a pattern of Wikipedia editing intersecting with Robert's financial self promotion.   At this ANI proceeding its observed that Robert's work here on Mars overlaps the work he sells on Amazon.  NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 23:39, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as unambiguous WP:PROMO. Bakazaka (talk) 00:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:PROMO and failing to meet WP:GNG. Each of the two reviews are for different products: one is for Tune Smithy and the other is for the related, but separate product, Bounce Metronome and does not mention Tune Smithy. Although they are independent and reliable sources with significant mentions of the two products, one such source for each product is not, in my opinion, sufficient to establish notability for either product. If the products were truly notable, there would be additional product reviews or other significant mentions of them. The other listed sources are all passing mentions of the product and do not establish notability. Ca2james (talk) 02:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Self-promotion as demonstrated at his latest ANI incident report. Regarding intrinsic notability, it has none. It was mentioned very casually of its existence in only one review article. Rowan Forest (talk) 17:10, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PROMO.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:47, 26 August 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.