Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Software

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Software. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Software|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Software. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Software

Singa (karaoke)

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

Article about a "karaoke streaming service", not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:CORP. As always, companies are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass certain defined notability criteria supported by WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage in media -- but this is referenced mainly to primary sources, such as the company's own self-published website about itself and press releases issued by another company that this company struck a business contract with, that are not support for notability -- and what there is for proper third-party coverage comes entirely from limited circulation business trade magazines that are largely just rewriting the press releases, rather than GNG-worthy coverage or analysis in real media.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt the company from having to pass GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH on stronger sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 15:40, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Finland. Bearcat (talk) 15:40, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Nothing found beyond press releases, same items as what's used for sourcing now in the article. Not enough sourcing found for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:52, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The TechCrunch article is the only thing I could find even remotely independent. There's really nothing to say about this company that can't be found within a couple clicks on the company's own website. -- LWG ^talk 16:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:49, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete laughably bad spam.--Burroughs'10 (talk) 17:10, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy (software)

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

Entirely promotional Amigao (talk) 00:59, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete is most appropriate here (or userfy with complete rewrite and new sourcing): I agree with the OP. This article, especially the configuration and version control sections read as promotional and violates WP:RSPX due to having two Twitter references. I don't know anything about this software, however this article likely needs a swift return to userspace or failing that, deletion. 11WB (talk) 01:14, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Didn't found significant coverage about the topic to justify it's notability. I barely see the coverage about the topic. Fade258 (talk) 06:48, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Projax

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

Fails WP:NSOFT; zero independent coverage exists. DePRODed in 2022 because the PRODer "failed to notify author", which is not an absolute requirement (and the dePRODer could have just as easily notified the author themselves) Interestingly, this page was created by User:Ngcoders and links to the website ngcoders.com. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oxygen Project

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

Fails the notability guideline for web content. All of the current sources are either primary sources or unreliable sources like blog posts. A quick search for more sourcing didn't turn up anything. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:08, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Computing, and Internet. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:08, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn’t this use general AfD and not Web? It seems to be related to a software project, not a website. — Lightcrowd (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1 TRACE

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

Advert of a piece of software. No independent sources, usual PR hype --Altenmann >talk 16:08, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of firewalls

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

Only one reference of dubious reliability. The topic may arguably meet WP:NLIST, yes, but what we have here is 99% WP:OR (likely obsolete, too). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Internet, and Software. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems a legit thing to have, would be surprised if no good sources compare. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to be almost entirely original research, therefore its accuracy is very unclear. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:38, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is original research. desmay (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Paprikaiser (talk) 20:58, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beerware

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG. Slight merge to open source is possible, but this page should not remain as-is due to a general lack of any notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:22, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, and Software. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:22, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Searching in Google Books, and reviewing past discussions, it seems there is some coverage in reliable sources ([1][2][3]), but all of it seems to be passing mentions. I would favor a redirect/merge to Open-source license or any other appropriate target. MarioGom (talk) 21:19, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Omneky

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

Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. All citations are press releases, media wires, or otherwise non-independent. No significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Blackpot-kettle (talk) 05:55, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 June 7. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:16, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:47, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TOOSOON. There are TechCrunch (2022, Reference #15) and Adweek (2022, Reference #19) articles but nothing from curated searches that is more recent to indicate these are anything more than a WP:SPIP blip.

Per nominator, References #1, 7-14, 16, 18, 20-23, 26-32 are some form of wire release; References #2, 4, 24 are brief mentions, Reference #25 is similar to the aforementioned TechCrunch and Adweek blip; Reference #6 is a contributor article; Reference #5 is an interview. I will refrain from commenting on the merits of References #3 and 17 not knowing the verifiability of Japanese but the former does say "PR Times" in the markup. Astapor12 (talk) 21:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep while most of the references are similar to press-releases, the TechCrunch, non-contributor Forbes (video on best AI startups), google books (search via books shows significant coverage) and other media provide some good reliable media coverage (not SPIP or paid). Norlk (talk) 12:05, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep techrunch, adweek and buisnessinsider give deep coverage to meet NCORP and count as reliable coverage.--Salamandra-12 (talk) 15:22, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

COLT (software)

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

WP:SPIP Only primary sources for this. Sean Brunnock (talk) 16:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:46, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There's too many pieces of software named Colt, but searching for "Code Orchestra Livecoding Tool" returns almost nothing. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:34, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)