Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpeedCommander

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SpeedCommander

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

Doesn't assert notability with reliable sources. ❤ Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 00:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Non-notable software. Only reference is a spam link to download the software. --v/r Electric Catfish (talk) 15:32, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No 3rd party references to establish notability of this software. Dialectric (talk) 17:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not appear to have reliable independent sources to establish notability, as per the WP:GNG. Vcessayist (talk) 02:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per WP:RED: there are numerous articles from Golem.de, PC BILD, PC WELT and some other reliable sources, all of which show that the software is notable enough for inclusion. That said, the article can't be solved with editing – it needs to be rewritten entirely, so it probably should be deleted with a summary indicating that a properly written non-promotional article should be written based entirely on reliable sources. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 22:40, 7 October 2012 (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.