Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W-PuTTY-CD


 * 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, no notability established. Tan     39  15:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

W-PuTTY-CD

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I think that this is a product article, but I'm not certain. The references for this article are: a user subpage at a private website; a link to a Google search that actually only returned 67 hits, not all unique; and the PuTTY page on Wikipedia. What exactly makes this particular subject notable enough for inclusion? I just can't tell. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, this isn't a product, per se, as it is free software, licensed under a very non-restrictive MIT License. Also, I took the time to read what it is, and I must say, that from a programmer's perspective, it is an interesting concept. However, that is original research. « D. Trebbien ( talk ) 17:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The first free SSH client library for windows--Puttyschool (talk) 13:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi CobaltBlueTony™, May I clarify my point of view I respect your opinion but I want to clarify the following few points
 * I think Google search hits count depends on sitemap data file, but I'm not certain. so we can’t not depend on it.
 * I add Google as I use it, but what about all search engines returning data about it.
 * And if we can depend on Google hit count, then what about this WiKi page W-PuTTY-CD was accessed more than 50 times from Google in just few days also some users posted comments in its talk page.
 * I followed all rules According to my understanding also I added the following two stub to the talk page. WikiProject Computing, WPFS, both as I think these project fulfill both criteria
 * Also I added this stub to the end of the page. compu-prog-stub And this means this is not a finished article,
 * I don’t say that this article is notable to all persons, but sure it is notable to programmers. You can observe by yourself after asking Google how these words PuTTY DLL used in promoting products through the internet.
 * Why Google returns this page W-PuTTY-CD and how it return it, isn't it still an internal wiki page.
 * if you checked W-PuTTY-CD license, You will see how it is honest enough and shows all copyrights, also I think this an important point to be noted as it is the first time the MIT license is used in this way.
 * --Puttyschool (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * User:Puttyschool, please assert that you have no idea who Eghabour and Halimshakka are, the other users who added comments. Also, what are you referring to by "WiKi page W-PuTTY-CD was accessed more than 50 times from Google in just few days"? The only way I know of to access hit counts for Wikipedia articles is http://stats.grok.se, but this does not have numbers for W-PuTTY-CD yet. « D. Trebbien ( talk ) 20:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Continuing with the line of questioning posed by User:dtrebbien, the fact that the talk page received 3 comments (all stating how wonderful this page is) is slightly suspect, since that tends not to happen. Each of these comments are the sole contributions to WP made by each editor and, looking at the last comment - the anon one - the IP address traces back to Egypt which is where User:Puttyschool hails from.  Regardless of the content of this page, something needs to be addressed regarding the methods being utilized by User:Puttyschool in trying to establish notability. Sonuvafitch (talk) 21:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't anything needs to be done. It's pretty futile and will have no affect on the closing decision of the afd. However keep an eye out for vote stacking SPAs here. -- neon white talk 22:01, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure I don’t know any of those users, also I spent more than one month reading WiKi guides, and I know such talk will not address notability, and enforces the opposite side. I was trying to say if we depend on CobaltBlueTony reference about Google hit count we can say ...... i.e. we cannot depend of Google hit count and such comments And if anyone can roll the history, of this article and talk page, he will notice that I created W-PuTTY-CD in a very stupid way before, at this time I was very new to wiki, also I’m shame to say that I did not respect admins point of view as at this time I did not know who are admins, I was calling all users Wikipedians, and I was thinking of them as user like me. Also it was deleted in less than 30 min.  Then I spent more time reading the guides to re-write W-PuTTY-CD, not as I’m biased to W-PuTTY-CD, but as this is my first lesson. When I write it back using what I learnt from the guides I noticed the notability note, so I add my point of view about finding references about free software and I think this was not good, as maybe this what encourage peoples, most probably interested with it, to write their comments. Then after a week while searching this page, I asked D. Trebbien why he adds the notability note, only to know the reason. And when I found the comments, I tried to remove them, but I decide to add a polite note holding the meaning of write your private opinion at the end of the page, i.e. we don’t want to hear your BOLD private opinion, but you can help with resources. To all of you admins, from different countries, I want to say something, I only care about W-PuTTY-CD as it is my first article and related to something I understand very well.  And to all who knows details about programming, can you tell us how much this library is an important and must have a place hear, not only as it free and simplifies a lot for developers, but as keeping it in WikipediA will be a good asset; also will stop all methods used by web sites to fool developers searching for a free DLL holding an SSH implementing. And especially for you Sonuvafitch please don’t pre-judge, the fixed IP most probably from Arabic wiki as it was in the same day the Arabic translation is evaluated and found notable as a seed that needs more enlargements.  --Puttyschool (talk) 23:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Starting new articles is tough. You have to really understand the criteria we use when deciding whether to keep or delete an article. Additionally, our guidelines aren't as clear as they could be. I know that lots of editors have had their writings deleted (yes, including me), and sometimes it is a trial-and-error process. Please do not be disheartened if W-PuTTY-CD is deleted, because most Wikipedians interpret the policy strictly. However, there are plenty of other articles which you might like to edit: Library (computing), C (programming language), Secure Shell, PuTTY, ... Also, I think that you are starting out really well, believe it or not. It is good that you wrote: "we cannot depend [on] Google hit count and such comments", because this shows reasonable understanding of original research. « D. Trebbien ( talk ) 00:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * may be I have a reasonable understanding of original research and what are the differences when we talk about PreRelease Software, at the same time I trust your opinions as you are always speaking from a neutral point of view, Thanks a lot and I’m sorry for the [typing mistake].--Puttyschool (talk) 01:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Don't worry, I'm not judging anything, and I can truly understand where you're coming from (my first article was deleted). Also note that I didn't give my opinion in the least regarding keep or delete.  In the case of this article, I didn't take the time I would consider adequate to look into the background of a topic before stating "keep" or "delete" - so I didn't say either.  I wouldn't just say "delete" because it looked like someone was stacking up praise for an article, because that would be judging an entire article based on one flaw.  Just bear in mind that people are very wary of SPAs, and the comments left on the article's talk page do look suspect. Sonuvafitch (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, they do look and they are strange, also with no users trace. May be my first comment was the cause, may be cause of Google return to this page, but I think you can judge only my comment and if it has a relation with the following comments Else you are giving me a green light to spoil any document which I don’t like using such comments. I don’t care if your first article is deleted or not, but I will care about the reasons, I can use the reasons to achieve further progress, but deleted equals yes without Good reasons means don’t try to create an article, it will be deleted. Sorry for miss understanding.--Puttyschool (talk) 17:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Strongly Keep with a note on top, I'm the author of this article, sure I must recommending this. Must Keep the Wikimedia Commons page, as this article is accepted by Arabic Wikipedia, and the commons page is shared.--Puttyschool (talk) 12:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I see no coverage from reliable secondary sources to assert encyclopedic notability, particularly for a piece of beta software. &mdash; Scientizzle 15:24, 4 August 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.