Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nettalk (IRC client)

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 no consensus. MuZemike 02:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nettalk (IRC client)

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

DELETE. Ugh! How far does the rabbit hole of non-notable chat clients go on Wikipedia, anyhow? Here lies another one. Zero evidence of non-trivial coverage, yet again. JBsupreme (talk)

Delete and in reply to nominator, the entire subcategory of software has these pockets of cruft. Miami33139 (talk) 07:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a better gsearch is [1], but using it, what I see is a lot of blogs recommending its use but no specific conventional RS. What I dod not know is the extent to which any of the listings there may be considered reliable in the subject field. I hope this group of discussions attracts someone who is actually an expert and can sort this out. DGG ( talk ) 01:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. This client is used by a lot of German users, but mostly less experienced users (as it is quite easy to use and has a beginner friendly user interface). Some sources I found: It has been mentioned on irc-junkie.org [2] (the most popular irc news site I know of) and has tons of download links spread over the web and many forum posts etc related to it [3][4] and the irc channel #nettalk on irc.ntalk.de is often quite crowded. So it seems still to be used by many people, but I don't know of any references in printed media though. I still think this might be worth keeping due to the amount of people that seems to be using it. Yarcanox (talk) 09:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep By Yarcanox's reasoning. Makes sense. Dream Focus 10:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Forum/blog posts do not constitute significant coverage. The IRC junkie link seems to be some sort of community site ("Thanks go to Elmaron for the tip and Mirici for quickly fixing the bug") If there is no proof of many people using this in RS then it should be deleted. Triplestop x3 17:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a bit off topic now, but I want to stress that irc-junkie is not a community site at all. It's solely powered by one single person assembling all important news in the IRC community. Those persons simply got mentioned because one of them made irc-junkie aware that such a bug exists and is so far unfixed and the other one is the developer of the client software who finally fixed it. Some people sometimes giving you hints what could be written about doesn't mean your site is community driven. Yarcanox (talk) 12:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge/Redirect to Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients#Nettalk. irc-junkie.org is a reliable source per WP:RS and is one of very few sites dedicated solely to IRC-related news and reviews. If the article is to remain little more than a stub article with a list of features however, it would seem to be more appropriate to simply add any relevant information to the tables in the comparison article and redirect there as we already do for many other clients. --Tothwolf (talk) 04:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Yarcanox. --Cycl^opia - ^talk 23:25, 8 October 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.