Content deleted Content added
FleetCommand (talk | contribs) |
FleetCommand (talk | contribs) Deleted one instance of personal attack, per "Comment on content, not on the contributor". |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
::I belive that the article merely lacks more References, but has had plenty of coverage. I see no competing software, or some other software for MS Windows which offers the same feature as this one, let alone one with much more coverage than this one.<br>The [[Talk:ImDisk|talk page]] discusses this a bit more. [[User:Hugo 87|HuGo_87]] ([[User talk:Hugo 87|talk]]) 19:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC) |
::I belive that the article merely lacks more References, but has had plenty of coverage. I see no competing software, or some other software for MS Windows which offers the same feature as this one, let alone one with much more coverage than this one.<br>The [[Talk:ImDisk|talk page]] discusses this a bit more. [[User:Hugo 87|HuGo_87]] ([[User talk:Hugo 87|talk]]) 19:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
::FYI, I've submitted the recent [[ImDisk]] "events" at [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#ImDisk|WP:WQA]]. –[[Special:Contributions/89.204.137.229|89.204.137.229]] ([[User talk:89.204.137.229|talk]]) 21:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: The article under discussion here has been {{tl|rescue}} flagged by an editor for review by the [[WP:Article Rescue Squadron|Article Rescue Squadron]]. [[Special:Contributions/89.204.137.229|89.204.137.229]] ([[User talk:89.204.137.229|talk]]) 02:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)</small> |
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: The article under discussion here has been {{tl|rescue}} flagged by an editor for review by the [[WP:Article Rescue Squadron|Article Rescue Squadron]]. [[Special:Contributions/89.204.137.229|89.204.137.229]] ([[User talk:89.204.137.229|talk]]) 02:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)</small> |
||
Revision as of 08:19, 7 July 2011
- ImDisk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails to comply with Wikipedia:Notability guideline as it does not provide any evidence of having received significant coverage in secondary reliable sources. Fleet Command (talk) 14:23, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Fleet Command (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Fleet Command (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- I belive that the article merely lacks more References, but has had plenty of coverage. I see no competing software, or some other software for MS Windows which offers the same feature as this one, let alone one with much more coverage than this one.
The talk page discusses this a bit more. HuGo_87 (talk) 19:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- I belive that the article merely lacks more References, but has had plenty of coverage. I see no competing software, or some other software for MS Windows which offers the same feature as this one, let alone one with much more coverage than this one.
- Note: The article under discussion here has been {{rescue}} flagged by an editor for review by the Article Rescue Squadron. 89.204.137.229 (talk) 02:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete A search finds only download links, no news coverage or independent reviews, in fact not even any user reviews. This software has not yet achieved notability. Looie496 (talk) 21:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Limit your search to get rid of the download link farms: google:ImDisk+site:microsoft.com shows links on Microsoft. –89.204.137.229 (talk) 22:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Non-notable software. References in article don't come close to WP:Reliable sources guidelines. As Looie496 notes, just a lot of download mirrors. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:16, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe convert three Google scholar citations to better references. My link search for diddy.boot-land.net was not convincing. –89.204.137.229 (talk) 22:34, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know what diddy.boot-land.net has to do with anything, but the three Google Scholar links just show abstracts; notability requires non-trivial reliable source coverage. None of those articles are about the software per se, and a passing mention doesn't cut it. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:48, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- diddy.boot-land.net is the source in the 3rd reference. Thanks for checking the scholar hits. –89.204.137.229 (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe convert three Google scholar citations to better references. My link search for diddy.boot-land.net was not convincing. –89.204.137.229 (talk) 22:34, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - Clearly fails notability and reliable sources requirements. - Nick Thorne talk 22:49, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment - using the search links on this page I found two reviews [1] and [2]. –89.204.137.229 (talk) 06:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- They are WP:SPS and hence not even acceptable, let alone evidence for notability. Fleet Command (talk) 08:07, 7 July 2011 (UTC)