Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wildscaper


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 20:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Wildscaper

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

Non-notable software product. Has previously been speedy deleted as blatant advertising, the current version is not as bad but the software is still of questionable notability. Note that while there are three sources presented, they all just define the term "RAD", and do not mention either of the products discussed in the article. RAD technology is notable, but these are non-notable implementations of it. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC) 
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   —Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - The article consists mostly of marketspeak. Rilak (talk) 07:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Maybe a rewrite to bring it into line as far as advert qualities and market-speak, but there are a ton of obscure software articles at Wikipedia, and this one is no different except in needs a clean-up. Proxy User (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, this seems to be an argument of the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS form. Can you provide any information to establish the notability of this software package?  Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:49, 16 November 2008 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 00:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - although not as bad as previous versions, it's still kind of written as an add (but not totally, which is why it's not speedy material). Dubious notability. RockManQ  (talk) 02:26, 20 November 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.