Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music Box (software)

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 keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Music Box (software)

[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)

Insufficient significant coverage located on a search using "music box" + Topologika in order to reduce noise. Aside from the current source (an industry publication for teachers), there was one paragraph in an article from The Independent, and after that, trivial mentions in articles about music software in general. I searched using Google, Newspapers.com, TWL, and JSTOR, so overall I think I've been fairly thorough here. It's not enough to meet WP:GNG. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Education, and Software. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~Keep Full page review here[1] in Child Education (also brief mention in same journal w/giveaway when version 2 came out, but may not be editorially independent[2]), additional TES mention here[3], besides the one already cited in the article[4], included in a group review in British Journal of Music Education[5] which I can't access, another mention in The Independent many years later[6]. Archives of substantial reviews in RISC User[7] and Archimedes World[8]. Jahaza (talk) 05:38, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If there isn't enough to warrant a full article, perhaps it can be on a list of Acorn software? ScienceFlyer (talk) 04:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have included a reference on Music Box in the article on Topologika. Please consider mentioning Music Box in the article on Acornsoft. Meanwhile, I will remove the orphan tag. On the basis of the references provided by Jahaza, I would keep the Music Box article. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:42, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources found by Jahaza. Andre🚐 18:23, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It seems like the sources Jahaza has provided above shows basic notability through WP:GNG and WP:NSOFT. I wish I could see what the British Journal of Music Education ref actually says, but the others are more than sufficient. - Aoidh (talk) 20:38, 18 September 2022 (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.