- 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. W.marsh 01:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a non-notable software product. Previously PRODed, but tag removed. Hawaiian717 23:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more information about it, and since there was no reasoning why it should be removed I removed that tag. And what do you mean by non-notable? It's the primary mediaplayer for DOS users and still being actively developed. Wermlandsdata
- The articled doesn't establish that this software is notable. The notability guidelines for software can be found at WP:SOFTWARE. If you can add to the article verifiable claims of the software's notability, then great and I'd withdraw the nomination. -- Hawaiian717 23:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added a link to an article from an online magazine. Other than that i don't know. It's mentioned all over when you ask DOS users how they listen/watch multimedia but there aren't that many magazines that cover DOS anymore. Wermlandsdata
- Merge with QuickView I think both should be combined to produce a weak article. --MECU≈talk 03:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- QuickView looks like a file viewer for Windows, while Quickview Pro is a media player for DOS. Since they're different programs, I don't think it makes sense to merge them. -- Hawaiian717 06:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree with Hawaiian717 on that part, QuickView relates to a much simpler program that isn't actively developed anymore. Wermlandsdata
- Then merge that with this -- 2 articles for 2 little-known products is 2 many. I can be persuaded to "vote" [AFDisnotavote] delete both -- Simon Cursitor 08:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Two little known? I'll agree that I've never heard of the Windows program before, but QuickView (Real and Pro) isn't a small unknown program. how many of you have actually used DOS for playing movies and sounds? QuickView is the biggest in that market. And, dosamp can have an article, but searching after that on Google turns up around 3.8 times more hits. I'll guess there are a myriad of programs described on wikipedia that could be removed if you start counting. I just wanted to add mroe information about qv since I saw it in a comparision list here. IMHO everything that's in one of those lists should have a seperate article. Wermlandsdata
- Then merge that with this -- 2 articles for 2 little-known products is 2 many. I can be persuaded to "vote" [AFDisnotavote] delete both -- Simon Cursitor 08:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree with Hawaiian717 on that part, QuickView relates to a much simpler program that isn't actively developed anymore. Wermlandsdata
- QuickView looks like a file viewer for Windows, while Quickview Pro is a media player for DOS. Since they're different programs, I don't think it makes sense to merge them. -- Hawaiian717 06:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No real content, WP is not Freshmeat. The dosamp is deletable as well. Pavel Vozenilek 03:24, 19 November 2006 (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.