Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinFlash Educator

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. Courcelles 23:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WinFlash Educator

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

Written mostly by the person who created it, it's basically a spammy advertisement for a non-noteworthy product. It appears to have one CNet review, which appears to be the amount of non-shareware-specific attention it's gotten. A previous AfD exists at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Winflash. Thargor Orlando (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Poorly referenced software article, with insufficient coverage to establish notability, created by an SPA as possibly promotional.Dialectric (talk) 10:57, 11 March 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, Automatic Strikeout (T • C) 02:05, 15 March 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, Mediran (t • c) 09:47, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion was had back several years ago. WinFlash Educator has been a well-received program for many years with 10's of thousands of users. Why does Mr. Orlando single out WinFlash when there are many programs of much LESS notability listed on the Flashcard Software and Spaced Repetition topics. Please leave this listing as it is. Here's a quote from the PREVIOUS delisting attempt "Keep it's an ace program actually. Still, the article is a bit of an ad and maybe needs toning down.--Bedivere 19:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)" All suggested modifications to make the listing less of an 'ad' were made at the time and remain. It would be unfair to remove this listing without doing a complete purge of all listed flashcard software products! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DickBryant (talk • contribs)

Comment: Quoting a user account (User:Bedivere) blocked and banned for sockpuppetting may not represent the keep case in ways User:DickBryant intends. BusterD (talk) 14:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Inclusion on Wikipedia needs significant coverage in independent reliable sources. That is not the case here. The sourcing in the article is not to reliable sources, nor can I find such coverage when I search myself aside from this CNet review. -- Whpq (talk) 22:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nothing approaching the WP:IRS standard here. A reasonable search finds that though the product has been available for many years, media buzz surrounding the product is sadly lacking. Since Wikipedia is not a directory of all softwares and insufficient sourcing exists to sustain the page, delete. BusterD (talk) 14:50, 29 March 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.