Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capella (notation program)

Capella (notation program)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not notable. The article's references aren't reliable sources, and I haven't found any reliable sources. Declined PROD. wumbolo ^^^ 11:41, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a private and completely wrong opinion by user "wumbolo". Why didn't he improve the article instead of pushing for the destruction of knowledge? --L.Willms (talk) 12:16, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 11:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 11:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 11:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – this is one of the top music notation software programs. Sources can be difficult to find because of the ambiguous name, but there are at least three additional reviews that can be used to improve the article: [1] [2] [3]. This passes WP:GNG. Brad v 15:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The second source is not a review. wumbolo ^^^ 15:38, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep was WP:BEFORE even done? On top of the two above, a quick books search finds The Instrumentalist (magazine) Volume 62 - Page 114, that passes WP:GNG but I agree sources are scarce. Widefox; talk 16:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That seems like very routine coverage. wumbolo ^^^ 21:29, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although this one appears borderline notability, enough sources have been identified and it's improved. WP:BLUDGEON is to be aware of on all these AfDs. Widefox; talk 22:57, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of bludgeoning, and that's why I never reply the same thing. However, maybe you should be also aware of it. wumbolo ^^^ 08:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note that "routine" isn't what you think it is. WP:ROUTINE is only for people and events. You've linked it in another software AfD, so it's clear you incorrectly mean that there and here, which does not apply to any of these software AfDs. See WP:BLUDGEON ..sheer volume of comments, such as contradicting every viewpoint that is different from their own. .. . (See also WP:ANI#User:Wumbolo) Widefox; talk 12:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Bradv/Widefox - I've added a cite for Bradv's first and confirmed all three on Wayback. Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats. Widefox; talk 22:57, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – It's one of the leading and most established music notation programs, dominant in Germany, where it's widely used for liturgical music, among other areas. In addition to the search term above (Finding sources), "Capella (notation program)", the term "capella Notensatzprogramm" would have been helpful: capella Notensatzprogramm. I'm uneasy about this mass AfD/Prod (Forte (notation program), Guitar Pro, Igor Engraver, Dorico, Steinberg). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Michael Bednarek: Thanks for the search term, but I still haven't found anything. Which sources are you specifically looking at? wumbolo ^^^ 08:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]