Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eraser (software) (2nd nomination)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:26, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eraser (software)

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

No indication that this software is notable. Plenty of other wiping software out there. Shadowjams (talk) 08:51, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to discussing the merits of keeping the article or deleting it. What is the threshold for notable WRT software? classactdynamo (talk) 03:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is a specific one. The WP:GNG of course apply. There have been failed attempts at a guideline both here and here. Shadowjams (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did not look in detail, but on a cursory evaluation of the general ideas laid out in the notability guidelines and a subsequent internet search, I understand your point. It is odd, though, that Wikipedia has not been able to firm up software notability guidelines. The extremes are easy to classify. Windows is notable, as is the "Hello World" program. I will look further into this when I get off work. classactdynamo (talk) 13:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Possible G4 speedy since it got deleted 3 years ago in AFD, would have to look at deleted edits for that. It did get good reviews though from softpedia and such.... and that's about it. There's nothing really worth writing about it other then it wipes files, and there are a TON of these products, in fact a ton of even unrelated programs wipe disk space nowadays - DOD-style or otherwise. While it does pass verification policy and maybe WP:GNG thanks to review spam, it definately falls into the not an indiscriminate collection thing a bit. Speaking of which, the proposed guideline they talked about 3 years failed and is located at Wikipedia:Notability_(software), not WP:SOFTWARE. If you are trying to look up sources for this, you'll probably have better luck with its main website "eraser.heidi.ie" not "eraser". If there are no other comments after this, just delete it, there's no sources in the article, it's barely even an article right now, AND its been deleted before. Ryan Norton 12:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete should be speedied after being deleted once before, but now it's here (still) no indication of notability, just one of many trivial utilities.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:19, 22 August 2010 (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.