Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zinf

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 keep. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zinf

Not notable, doesn't claim to be notable, obsolete and isn't going to become notable, no references Miami33139 (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no evidence of notability. JJL (talk) 02:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. According to the article and google hits on Zinf/Freeamp, this used to be a well-known music player. It's our job to document obsolete software as much as current software -- perhaps more so. I disagree that the article is non-notable, and references are being added. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 07:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- nothing has been added to this article in over a year, particularly not any references. Miami33139 (talk) 22:11, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry, I just assumed that since there are references there and you said there weren't any in the nom, that they were new additions. Whether they are good references is a different question. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 00:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Not the most notable software, but definitely past minimal threshold of "worth an article". LotLE×talk 22:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Minimum threshold is the criteria test of WP:Notability. This article does not meet that. Miami33139 (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Of all the non-notable software projects on Wikipedia, at least this one has some history and pedigree. §FreeRangeFrog 02:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Thus far, it appears only one person wants to delete this article and this same person has created a controversy by this and similar actions. This was a highly popular program at one time, as evidenced by the massive footprint it has left behind in the Bitpedia. Regardless of whether it is actively supported or not right now, it is definitely notable for the large number of people who used it then and remember it now. Please state clearly and in detail precisely why you think it is not notable, using the text of the WP:Notability page because thousands of past users would disagree and it would inevitably be created again by people who didn't know of your opinion or your action to erase this tiny historical record of it's existence. I'm glad I happened to check on it today. I was following up on freeamp after examining the huge number of records it left in the BitPedia. Aaron Walkhouse (talk) 07:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I also recommended a delete, and I note that the "strange" example you cite is of a page that was indeed deleted. There is no evidence of notability for this software. References 2 and 3 do not contain the text string Zinf at all! Reference 4 is simply an WP:OR assertion. Reference 1 is a promotional message in a newsgroup. There is no coverage in reliable sources demonstrated. The article should be deleted (or possibly redirected). JJL (talk) 13:02, 18 February 2009 (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.