Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QuickPar

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. No consensus to delete. The issue of merging can continue on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

QuickPar

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

DELETE as a non-notable software product which lacks non-trivial coverage from multiple reliable third party publications. I'm beginning to worry we are lending WP:BIAS to these types of software applications on Wikipedia, but hopefully not in this one instance. JBsupreme (talk) 07:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep I've added references to this article. Notability is not temporary. The nom is acting in bad faith in nominating this article and SmartPAR for AfD as he was already aware of a reliable source that covers this subject. This book is linked in the Deletion Review that JBsupreme initiated after he did not like the outcome of the Parchive AfD:
Wang, Wallace (2004-10-25). "Finding movies (or TV shows): Recovering missing RAR files with PAR and PAR2 files". Steal this File Sharing Book (1st ed.). San Francisco, California: No Starch Press. pp. 164 –&#32, 167. ISBN 1-59327-050-X. Retrieved 2009-09-24.
Despite JBsupreme's claims otherwise, the above book gives several pages coverage to this software and also includes a number of screenshots.
--Tothwolf (talk) 08:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Your persistent claims that I am acting in "bad faith" are COMPLETELY unfounded and treading on personal attacks. I strongly advise you to withdraw said remarks. Furthermore, the citations you have provided here do not surpass the definition of non-trivial coverage at all. Sorry. JBsupreme (talk) 19:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is the DeFacto stand-alone software application used for verifying Usenet downloads as well as many other types of files. It was the first mainstream application to utilise the par2 standard. --WebHamster 13:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete One mere mention as a tool does not make something notable. Miami33139 (talk) 18:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I wondered how long it would take you to show up here, Miami33139, since you already publicly admitted to stalking my contribs and following me around to XfD. Your assertion of "one mere mention" is not backed up by the fact that this software is covered in published works (multiple pages of text and screenshots) and making the assertion you just made only serves to discredit you even further. --Tothwolf (talk) 18:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - I am dubious about the need for all these bits of software, but it seems reasonably sourced.- Sinneed 18:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Enough references, software is still in use. 83.254.210.47 (talk) 19:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 14:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to an Implementations section in Parchive. Demonstrably verifiable, but I can't see it ever growing beyond its current stub-length. —Korath (Talk) 15:40, 28 September 2009 (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.