Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veracity (software) (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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Veracity (software)

[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)

This long-dead software project never got multiple non-trivial mentions in reliable third party sources Samboy (talk) 18:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:04, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as nominator. This article survived AfD eight years ago, back when this open source project was being actively maintained, and back when the criteria for inclusion was looser. Right now, there appears to be the following mentions:

this 2011 article about Veracity
An entire chapter in the 2011 book Version control by example, by Eric Sink, who is involved with SourceGear who made Veracity (so this is not a third party mention)
A one word mention in a 2012 book.
A one-word mention in the 2012 book “Professional Team Foundation Server 2012” on page 91
There was also an OsCon speech
A one word mention in a 2011 Dr. Dobbs article.

I am a pretty strict inclusionist, but this project came and died within a couple years, never got three non-trivial sources of coverage, and probably deserves a one-paragraph mention in Comparison of version-control software, not an entire standalone article. Samboy (talk) 19:32, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My opinion has not changed from the previous nomination: does not demonstrate nor indicate notability. No need to leave a redirect as it is a potentially misleading disambiguator. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Pinging previous !voters @Greenrd:, @Fritzophrenic:, while Jeff Dickey has not been active for several years. Also, @Czarkoff:, although editor has not been active for the past year. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:30, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is a stub for all I care, and this article doesn't look like encyclopedic content, and the last section is just some stuff about the developers. 96.230.240.122 (talk) 03:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Had to be removed long ago. Orientls (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2020 (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.