Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dev-C++

Dev-C++

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence of notability, just a lot of links to product's pages. Just-expired RfC on this issue petered out in a few days, but did not address the concerns about the sources. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 19:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:03, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Google books shows that this is featured in several C++ books, including whole chapters in Liang's "Introduction to Programming with C++" and Yevick's "A first course in computational physics and object-oriented programming with c++" --Karnesky (talk) 20:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep I have confirmed Karnesky's findings. I strongly request the nominator do a more thorough search in the future before nominating another AfD. — HowardBGolden (talk) 20:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
comment Thank you for your advice. I've not I think proposed it hastily: only after an RFC where a majority of editors doubted its notability, no sources were found (or at least none anyone thought worth adding to the article), two other editors suggested AfD and one Proded it.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 21:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I can understand HBG's passion: even the overly conservative search for "bloodshed dev-c++" (in quotes) leads to over 60 books, which should give one pause. But, I agree that you weren't overly hasty based on the RFC & that you acted in good faith. It is not clear whether you agree to withdraw your nomination, based on the notability that is established by multiple books or whether you have additional objections that need to be addressed at AfD --Karnesky (talk) 23:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]