Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visual Build (3rd nomination)

: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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 20:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

=[[:Visual Build]]=

AfDs for this article:

{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visual Build}}

{{AFD help}}

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

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Visual Build}})

14 yr old stub page that appears to be nothing more than an advert Hexware (talk) 13:07, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

:: Refer to WP:NTEMP 2nd paragraph ({{xt|While notability itself is not temporary, ...}}). QEnigma talk 07:56, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::Could you elaborate on what you mean by citing this policy? Aaron Liu (talk) 14:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  • Weak keep: Article desperately needs expansion from the two sources cited, which do give it notability. I dunno what @QEnigma means as those are clearly both independent sources. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. .NET Developer's Journal appears to be more of a blog than a reliable source that demonstrates notability. [https://web.archive.org/web/20190708130202/http://kevinalons.sys-con.com/ The author] of the article appears to only have written one article for that outlet and does not appear to be a journalist. Brandon (talk) 13:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
  • :The journal has a then-big publisher, Sys-Con Media, that hosts the cloud development expo advertised at the bottom. Looking at Groklaw#Media controversy, they have some sort of editing process that allowed tons of false claims to slip through, including the doxxing of a FOSS law reporter for no apparent reason. You're correct that the source's reliability is questionable, and on further review, it has little information (though addressed directly). Now that there's only one good source, I'll change my !vote to neutral. {{pb}}We don't need journalists to write articles and reviews about software to have notability; not sure what you meant by that part. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:18, 30 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.