Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autopano Pro (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. — Scientizzle 02:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Autopano Pro (software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
WP:COATRACK to disguise the fact that the article is in fact about the "second largest" photograph, not the software, and there's no independent sources to verify the claim anyway. Pairadox (talk) 02:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And where is the source for your claim? Roguegeek (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Should also be noted this is the second request for deletion of this article by Pairadox after their first request was already denied. Roguegeek (talk) 02:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- So he took it to AfD after a speedy was declined. Big whoop. That happens a lot. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Snide comment from Roguegeek aside, the "source" for my claim is the article itself. Pairadox (talk) 02:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Should also be noted this is the second request for deletion of this article by Pairadox after their first request was already denied. Roguegeek (talk) 02:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete. Once we ignore the part of this article that is about a photograph it created, there are only three short sentences left, none of which address the program's notability. There may be something here, but it's hidden by the coatrack issues. Zetawoof(ζ) 09:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Once you get rid of the coatrack stuff, there's nothing there about notability or anything else. --L. Pistachio (talk) 09:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Delete weakly: It sounds like the event was something, alright, but only in an "in the news" sort of way, or a bit of trivia. The product seems to be yet another program. I'm sure it's good. I'm sure I'll never need it. Utgard Loki (talk) 19:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless secondary sources can be found. The software appears to fail notability requirements and the article was created as spam (see the original creator's comments here). It has been speedy deleted three times already as spam (logs). The photograph mentioned in the article was created as a promotional stunt for the software, as mentioned here (click on "about"). – jaksmata 21:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 23:18, 12 February 2008 (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.