Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WebCatalog


 * 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 draftify‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Daniel (talk) 21:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

WebCatalog

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I disagree with the AfC acceptance. Ignoring Valnet content farm, non-independent sources, and simple database entries, there simply isn't enough information or reviews available to justify an article. The Indian Express piece is just a guide that happens use this application, nothing usable to make an article.

That leaves a short review and a showcase. I don't think those sources are enough to make a whole article. A WP:BEFORE check revea;ed no usable sources/reviews. Ca talk to me! 13:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Internet. Ca talk to me! 13:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep: Here are some notable sources:, , , , , . I have added them to the article. It meets WP:NSOFT and/or WP:GNG. Annh07 (talk) 18:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Are those reliable sources? To me they look like:
 * Blog
 * Blog that looks suspiciously similar to the first one
 * Unreliable source (no information on editorial controll or the writer's credentials)
 * Blog
 * Unreliable source (no information on editorial controll or the writer's credentials)
 * Blog
 * Blog
 * -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 23:10, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:44, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete – could not locate any additional sources. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 23:13, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Draftify again. This was already draftified before. made some great improvements, but the sources are still too weak to imply notability. Owen&times;  &#9742;  21:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
 * As the nominator, I support draftification as well, there are some content that could be useful if this software gets more coverage/reviews. Ca talk to me! 22:37, 2 December 2023 (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.