Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Pomodoro technique software timers

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. The consensus is that there is not sufficient evidence of notability, and that the fact that all the links are weblinks rather wikilinks indicates that the list does not consist of notable entries PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pomodoro technique software timers

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

1. no evidence of notability 2. Wikipedia is not a software catalogue 3.PROD was contested but these failings not addressed Widefox (talk) 09:30, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 09:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 10:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 10:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — Not notable, article lacks sufficient context. C_(u)w_(t)C_(c) 10:44, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:CSD A1 defines context as

If you are able to search for sources, then the article does have enough context. This criteria should only be used when you have no idea what the article is about.

The article's title gives a clear idea about the context of article.

trunks_ishida (talk) 23:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lists should consist of notable entries. If any of this was backed by good references, could merge to Pomodoro technique but as it stands, without references, just delete. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've added many references to the entries in article which are from notable independent sources. I will not suggest merging this article with Pomodoro technique because this list is likely to expand and that would lead Pomodoro technique as unwieldy. trunks_ishida (talk) 23:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve I've added several references to the article.

My reasons for keep:

This is a notable topic. A search on Google(or any other search engine) shows that. I agree that not all entries are notable but software like Tomighty, Pomodairo and Orkanizer are actually notable. This page had around 1400 pageviews in past 30 days. Page view statistics

There are many articles Wikipedia which could classify as 'software catalogues'. Actually there is a category [Category:Lists of software] which deals with articles like this.

There are many notable entries left out, external links to be improved and many discrepancies to be corrected but this shouldn't be a reason to delete an article.

trunks_ishida (talk) 23:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Notability is not the issue, the problem is that this is a weblink catalogue, which Wikipedia is not for (WP:NOTDIR). A list of any notable software can be part of the main article Pomodoro Technique. Sandstein 08:42, 26 May 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.