Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VolksWriter


 * 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 keep, but strongly recommend that article is expanded and sourced in the near future. Natalie 00:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

VolksWriter

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested PROD. PROD/AFDed because of a lack of any assertion of notability, and for no sourcing/reference to establish notability. PROD was contested under the argument that being "early computing software" made it inherently notable. I disagree with this. That may be an "assertion" of notability, and enough to avoid Speedy if software was eligible for A7 Speedy, but sourcing/references are still required for the article to remain. TexasAndroid 18:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no secondary, reliable sources noted in the article. There seems to be articles written about Volkswriter 3.  However, I am unsure if this artcile is references that particular software due to the article's incredibly lack of substance.  -- Blind  Eagle  talk ~ contribs  18:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * BlindEagle's second sentence implores me to vote Keep here. He states that there seem to be articles written about VolksWriter 3 (being copyrighted software, you would not have multiple word processors named VolksWriter), and these articles would be the sourcing/references required for the article to remain on Wikipedia. Simply "being a stub" is not reason to delete an article; let's use the sources that BlindEagle claims that exist to improve the article and keep it! Andy Saunders 19:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Sources are available to verify notability. VolksWriter was a fairly well known product back in the day. A quick Google search brings up a few book and journal hits including the Encyclopedia of Microcomputers (ISBN 0824722795) and a Journal hit . VolksWriter's VW and VW3 extensions are still widely recognized. • Gene93k 20:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability does not expire. Needs sources, but this was a highly regarded application back in the day though it never really competed at the top level. --Dhartung | Talk 22:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - sourcing may be difficult as it is an old product, but it was a significant presence during its time. a Google news search shows that reviews were written about the product in major newspapers. -- Whpq 17:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Andy, but he should source it since he seems gung-ho. &mdash;ScouterSig 14:24, 31 October 2007 (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.