Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BSR Screen Recorder (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. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BSR Screen Recorder

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

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 17:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about software that doesn't have significant coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. I searched and could not find any. Sourcing in the article consists of primary sources and unreliable sources. The previous AFD was withdrawn although I cannot understand why. Whpq (talk) 02:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as reliable sources are unaware of it. Even if one comes with bullet-proof sources to establsih notability, the article has to be rewritten entirely to get rid of promotional tone, so deletion is the only way to go here. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:13, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. Googling turns nothing, no surprise for yet another screen capture utility. Msnicki (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I previously withdrew the AFD since I was less experienced at that time I had made a few bad AFDs. Looking over the article again I see no reliable sources and nothing to significantly distinguish the software from any other screen capture utility. MorganKevinJ^(talk) 16:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find any notable coverage from independent secondary sources enough to establish WP:NSOFT and as it has been mentioned above, the article is written in a very promotional tone. --LoudHoward (talk) 13:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No independent reliable sources or coverage given. --Artene50 (talk) 23:48, 6 August 2012 (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.