Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Video Converter 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. Jayjg (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Video Converter Ultimate

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails to comply with Wikipedia notability guideline as it has failed to provide significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. Cursory web search yielded the following results: I advise the article to be deleted. Fleet Command (talk) 15:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) CNET Download.com and Softonic didn't feature this product at.
 * 2) Softpedia features both Windows version and Mac version of the product but Windows version is reviewed by no one and Mac version is reviewed by no more than 45 people.
 * 3) Betanews Fileforum does not feature the Windows version but the Mac version is very unpopular. The standard version of the product for Windows is also downloaded no more than 43 times since 8 December 2008.
 * 4) A cursory search in Google Books came empty.

Addendum: Oh, I forgot to mention: The article is also written like an advertisement as it is mainly a list of features and system requirements. Fleet Command (talk) 15:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: I just noticed that the creator of this article,, is banned from Wikipedia for publishing promotional contents. Contribution log shows that his major contributions before getting banned was made to this article. Fleet Command (talk) 15:50, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete – This particular Brand is not notable as of today. However Xilisoft Video Converter Ultimate shows well over 50 articles, primarily PCWorld, but several other reviews from the likes of the news againcies such as the  Washington Post .  Maybe article should be written about them? JAAG  Talk 20:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: notability not established with third-party reliable sources. --  李博杰   | —Talk contribs email 00:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree with JAAG. This article should be changed to Xilisoft Video Converter Ultimate. ImTOO is actually a subdivision of Xilisoft, when you look at their products, they all say made by Xilisoft Corporation. In fact, ImTOO Video Converter is exactly the same as Xilisoft Video converter except with a slightly different interface.(Celicaman (talk) 02:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC))
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- Pcap  ping  10:14, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep but rename to Xilisoft Video Converter. This is a rebranded version of that line of products with a different skin ("Ultimate" is just one edition, they also have Standard, Premium, etc.); see   . Although these guys are well-known spammers on other sites as well, their stuff appears to be the subject of some independent commentary under the Xilisoft brand. PC World review, reproduced by Washington Post , more reviews: , , , ,  (last one is from Mladá fronta DNES). Other mainstream media mentions:  . Don't forget to add ffmpeg hall of shame for WP:NPOV. Pcap  ping  11:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey! What is this? You use warez website as a reputable source? I did not think your standard of quality is so low! And you take some guy posting in a forum as source? There is no way anyone would accept sources number 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as remotely reliable! And please do not try to make the list of your sources big by inserting duplicate links. It is dishonest! Fleet Command (talk) 12:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Your comments are dishonest or clueless. I used the crack only link as additional evidence that products are identical, not to claim any notability based on that. And I've only duplicated one link for different purposes: (1) part of the discussion that these are identical products, and (2) part of the discussion that these guys are known spammers. The links supporting notability of the Xilisoft Video Converter Ultimate are all from reliable sources. And the first link supporting the fact these products are nearly identical is from a round-up review. Conveniently, you decided to badger me with the last link there, ignoring all other. Please find someone else to harass. Pcap ping  13:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, on the contrary, I think I hit the spot. Software pirates are immoral and untrustworthy and are not remotely reliable. Shame on you for ever trying to quote a software pirate and putting their word on the same rank as a reliable source, for whatever reason. And in case you don't know, blogs and forums posts are not considered reliable sources. Sources #2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are thus void. Fleet Command (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I replied on on my talk regarding your repeated accusations and incivility directed against me. This isn't the kind of discussion the closing admin needs to wade through. Pcap  ping  22:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, dear Pcap. I think the tension between you and me is now lightened, so both of us are now ready to talk logically and per Wikipedia guidelines, with the goal of improving Wikipedia in mind. So, allow me to start: The following is an assessment of the sources which you have provided above. Please state whatever objection you have in regard to my assessments, preferable in a granular manner.


 * And by the way, people, how do you know ImTOO is same as Xilisoft? Maybe they are two software with the same name under two different brands? Any evidence? Fleet Command (talk) 12:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "how do you know ImTOO is same as Xilisoft?" They are the same company with the same products just different skins. If you email xilisoft, they will admit to it. someone ask about it on their official facebook and they said imtoo is just a subdivision of xilisoft. I'm no wiki guru, but pcword, washington post, and usatoday seems like reputable sources to me. U can also look at their alexa rating, xilisoft is up there. so replacing imtoo with xilisoft makes sense to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.207.177.237 (talk) 06:16, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * “I emailed and they denied. Xilisoft accused ImTOO of copyright violation. I even have the email. I send you a copy if you want.” But how can you believe me? Maybe I have faked an email! That's why we have WP:OR: Original research is not allowed in Wikipedia! Fleet Command (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Promotional article written by the creator of the product.&mdash;J. M. (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2010 (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.