Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BuildMaster (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. ✗plicit 00:24, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BuildMaster

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Nothing has changed since the last AFD which resulted in deletion, this is a non-notable software product. No independent SIGCOV to be found. Article creator has a COI. I also nominated the company that developed BuildMaster at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inedo. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:22, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:22, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Current sources in the article are basically all primary, doing my own searching turned up nothing else either. Moritoriko (talk) 14:42, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:44, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 19:11, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Far from notable as a technical product. The available sourcing doesn't put it past the bar for a commercial organisation either. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - why is there a "Highlights" section? "Main features" not much better. Extremely promotional, no evidence of GNG. Caleb Stanford (talk) 20:19, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We also might want to take a look at ProGet and Otter (software). It appears there is a slew of articles about Inedo (company) and related software products that were written without regard for notability and SIGCOV. Caleb Stanford (talk) 20:29, 11 August 2025 (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.