Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Appinstaller

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. No evidence of notability in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Rlendog (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Appinstaller

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

I found no notability. The only sources in the article are download pages, a blog, and a personal website. Fails WP:N. SL93 (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that this article should be removed. The sources you found are the same for all software projects. For example the software ffmpeg has a personal page ffmpeg.com and many sites were you can download it from. Software is lucky to have blog posts about it. Imagine you were reading the blog and said appinstaller! What is that? And then went to google it.. isn't that what wikipedia is for? When someone says what was the civil war? or what is app installer wikipedia has the answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieee8023 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
:— Note to closing admin: Ieee8023 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. -Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 02:44, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with notable topics - WP:N. SL93 (talk) 00:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you seriously comparing the Civil War to this software? SL93 (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Entire article is a howto. Fails WP:MOS. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 02:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: the main difference between this software and ffmpeg is that ffmpeg is discussed in reliable sources in depth with implication of notability, and this software isn't. That's why ffmpeg article will stay, and this one won't. It is the worst attempt at WP:OTHERSTUFF I've ever seen. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 00:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So I guess based on "Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal" you would consider the section titled "How To Configure" not appropriate. I would say that the first few paragraphs are fine and should remain. It simply states what it is to educate people on how this software is different from other software. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieee8023 (talk • contribs) 09:43, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It is not fine because the software is not notable. SL93 (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Significant coverage" This site among many has a page dedicated to this software. Claims over 1000 downloads http://www.brothersoft.com/app-installer-270019.html
  - "Reliable" It's a site that hosts a bunch of software. Meaning this is software.
  - "Sources" & "Independent of the subject" This site and many sites independently added this software for download
  - "Presumed" There are many of these sites
  - You can also view downloads from this site that hosts this open source project: http://sourceforge.net/projects/appinstaller/files/stats/timeline?dates=2009-07-30+to+2012-02-13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ieee8023 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Every software has downloads and no matter how many they have, it does not show notability. SL93 (talk) 13:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No significant coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. Simply being downloaded is insufficient to meet Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines. -- Whpq (talk) 14:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.