Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dbfree

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. J04n(talk page) 20:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dbfree

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

I've nominated this article for the following reasons

The article has no reliable third-party sources on several pages of search results
The article's only references are links to its own homepage (primary source)
The content sounds like advertising at times
The article focuses on one particular piece of software, so it can't be merged sensibly
The original creator of the article was incidentally called "Maxsiseditor" – the name of the company that developed the software

In addition, I've also nominated Maxscript, since it describes a component of this software and uses the same references as this article. Astatine211^Talk 22:56, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree. Most of articles on the same subject (Xbase, Clipper and dBase-related old programming languages) cannot provide external third-party sources, mainly because most of them are no longer available nowaday, they were mainly on printed media and the original producers are out of business. hfufna^Talk 00:24, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFF comes under arguments to avoid in deletion debates. The other articles are poorly referenced, but Google Books searches show reliable source coverage. Older media may be harder to retrieve but they appear to be available. Let's focus on Dbfree and Maxscript. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - I can find no significant independent coverage in reliable sources to establish that inclusion criteria are met. Searches in books and scholar fro "DBfree" generate hits, but they refer not to this software, but rather to database object memmory allocation/deallocation functions. Searches for "Maxscript" turn up nothing for this product as opposed to 3D Studio. Referencing in the article is a primary source. -- Whpq (talk) 14:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This software in fact does exists and a deeper search on Google do produces lots of results, most of them referring to usage of the underlying programming language. The fact that most of results come from the same source does not affect its reliability, being common practice to group in one site all the code related to an almost extinct language. The missing of adequate external reliable references is in common with the generic term Xbase, also cited as unsourced material, despite this term it's been used since 1986 by the programmer's community all around the world. The term MaxScript can be ambiguos but that is a fact that the software itself, by mean of its functions, reports its internal script processor having that exact name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.16.121.76 (talk) 19:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Nobody is disputing the existence of the software. If you deeper Google search has turned up sources, please present them here for evaluation. I'll happily change my mind if significant coverage can be shown. -- Whpq (talk) 19:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 10:14, 5 April 2013 (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.