Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyberduck

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Cyberduck}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Cyberduck}})

No evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines: no independent sources cited at all, even after being tagged for sources for 12 years, and tagged for notability further back than that. (I put a PROD on this article, but it was quite rightly removed, because there had previously been a PROD, which I hadn't seen. That previous PROD was removed without explanation by an editor who expressed the opinion that the subject might not be notable.) JBW (talk) 20:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. Shellwood (talk) 21:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: No sourcing that isn't primary or in a RS now in the article, all I can pull up are download links or GetHub items. Nothing for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

:Keep: There's a review of Cyberduck 3 that's already in the article from Ars Technica. There is also a tutorial on how to use Cyberduck in [https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Definitive_Guide_to_Squarespace/c5A-DwAAQBAJ this] 2017 book by Sarah Martin. She has a decade of digital marketing experience and describes how to use Cyberduck to build a website with Squarespace. [https://www.macworld.com/article/230260/transmit-5-review-expands-file-transfer-to-nearly-all-the-cloud-services.html This] review of another file transfer utility called Transmit makes comparisons between Transmit and Cyberduck. The review is written by Glenn Fleishman, a career journalist.

:There aren't inline citations for any of these sources in the article at the moment, but in my opinion, the sources that exist are sufficient to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 05:40, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Per the references given by HyperAccelerated I believe that this page is sufficiently notable. BJackJS talk 16:16, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: In addition to the previously discussed sources, there's a Macworld review [https://www.macworld.com/article/212698/cyberduck4-2.html here] and a tiny little section in Mac Life [https://books.google.com/books?id=29IDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PP30&dq=cyberduck&hl=en#v=onepage&q=cyberduck&f=false here]. [https://books.google.com/books?id=qG2Bb4JtfwgC&pg=PA217&dq=cyberduck&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0#v=onepage&q=cyberduck&f=false This] book also seems to provide good coverage. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 04:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.