Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultimate++


 * 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. JERRY talk contribs 05:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Ultimate++

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:NN software. Only promotional and release announcements were findable in reliable sources. Toddst1 (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, notability not asserted. --Yamla (talk) 18:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad the wikipedia administrators are vigilant but the reason for deletion seem insufficient. Have a look at similar projects: Anjuta, Code::Blocks, MinGW_Developer_Studio, GLUI, Agar_(software). Also Sourceforge and Freshmeat, are very notable, and are as apparent enough reference. Phirox (talk) 00:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: any user can propose an article for delete (preferably based on Wikipedia rules). Not every AfD is necessarily evil conspiracy of administrators trying to suppress the progress and enlightement of the masses. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 00:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article did exist before (see a forum dedicated to it) and was deleted twice.


 * I did some work with the IDE, it is interesting and breath-taking piece of work (and often frustrating as the authors decided make it so much different from all other IDEs) but the novel approach doesn't really establish encyclopedical notability of the subject. It is very hard for Wikipedia to reliably cover software, except for the very few widely used tools. Many software articles end up unmaintained, obsolete and full of marketing. History of Ultimate++ page on WP doesn't make me optimist.


 * Quite a many of the other IDE's mentioned above should be, IMHO, deleted as well. For a truly massive list of IDE articles see Comparison of integrated development environments. I suspect most of these articles were created just because other stuff was already here and we don't want to feel as total loosers who don't even have a text on WP. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 00:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   —User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 04:09, 12 January 2008 (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.