Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Safari 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 delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Safari 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)

There is a company by this name which is notable, Safari (software), but a BEFORE only turned up coverage of the more notable entity. There were a few snippets in Books, but that's about this. This article was redirected to the more notable company, but that redirect was taken to RfD, where the result was to restore the article, and it looks like a bare consensus to take to AfD. See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 7#Safari Software. Most of the info in this brief article is not supported by the current refs, one of which is non-reliable, and is just barely mentioned in that, the blog post being mostly about Epic Games. Fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, a search on Newspapers.com returned info on a "Safari Software", but turns out it was another company, based in Wisconsin, unrelated to this one but happens to also have been founded in 1989. Digging deeper found nothing relating to this company. I am however happy to change my vote if others can find sources on this company. NemesisAT (talk) 16:14, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find any sources either. In the RfD I was accused of not following the process, but I followed WP:BEFORE before changing the article WP:BOLDLY into a redirect. It feels WP:BURO to go through the AfD anyway... PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:20, 18 July 2021 (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.