Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TimberWolf Content Management (2)

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 of the debate was delete. --Ezeu 21:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TimberWolf Content Management

We deleted this in March as non-notable (see first AfD), and now it's back. Deletion via {{db-repost}} was denied with the rationale that "content is substantially different and the situation may have changed since last AfD". Well, no, it isn't (from what I remember), and hasn't. Delete and protect, please. Sandstein 16:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -- Kicking222 17:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Nothing Notable. Software does not always get listed, especially when the authors pluralize with the letter "Z". Dominick ^(TALK) 17:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The content is substantially different from the originally AfDed version. As for whether the situation has changed, it's not my place as the speedying (or not) admin to make that determination; that's why I removed the tag instead of deleting the article. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I, the author changed all the content. The previous AfD was very baised and deserved to be deleted. This one does not deserved to be deleted and is very unbaised. MarcConnor 07:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not (and was not) a matter of bias. It's a matter of notability. We do not cover every piece of software in the world, only notable ones. Can you show that your software meets the (proposed) standards of WP:SOFTWARE? Sandstein 07:46, 20 May 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.