Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FreeFileSync

FreeFileSync

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

A product of no demonstrable significance. Sources lack intellectual independence, they are affiliated or based on press releases, with the exception of one product review which is not primarily about the product but is a side by side comparison of multiple products. Guy (Help!) 06:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. No indication of notability per Wikipedia standards. A supposed CNET.com quotation in the reception section (the only source cited there) is sourced to a link which leads to a download page - for FreeFileSync along with multiple similar applications. Even if the quoted text appeared there (it doesn't), this would hardly be a legitimate third-party review, since websites offering things for download are inevitably going to praise them. And a search on the web finds little commentary but blogs, and comparative reviews discussing similar software. The only other commentary on the application seems to revolve around alleged malware content. Lacking meaningful in-depth third-party commentary of the type WP:RS mandates, any article can only either be promotional guff, or negative content regarding malware. Neither of which constitute a valid Wikipedia article. 2A00:23C1:8250:6F01:130:351B:68D3:4C6D (talk) 07:36, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: While researching another issue (which I will not mention here because it has nothing to do with the question of whether this article should be deleted) I did a lot of searching, and I found that what little coverage exists consists of:

Download descriptions from websites which clearly offer for download every program they can find (including a couple of programs I wrote years ago which might have three users total if you count my mother).
Discussions about how the author has tried to monetize the program by offering a super-duper extra-features version if you pay him.
Discussions about how the author has tried to monetize the program bundling malware that installs things on your computer without your permission
Promotional material obviously written by the author of the program.

What I did not find was anything that satisfies the requirements of WP:GNG. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. – TheGridExe (talk) 13:34, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of depth-of-coverage required by WP:GNG. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:25, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence in article or searches of passing WP:NSOFTWARE or WP:GNG. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:08, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I found articles about FreeFileSync on PCWorld, Framasoft (in french), CNET, MakeUseOf, LifeHacker, TechRepublic, MakeTechEasier and others.
Also, maybe not an indicator of notability, but at least, popularity: on AlternativeTo, FreeFileSync has (a lot) more "likes" (for what it's worth) than all of the alternatives, including rsync, Beyond Compare, IPFS, GoodSync, SyncBack, SparkleShare, SyncToy, Allway Sync and many others. (Note that all of the alternatives I've just mentioned have their own Wikipedia article).
(BTW, I'm new here, I hope I understood the purpose of this page correctly). StayAwhileAndListen (talk) 17:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]