Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unfuddle

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. - Mailer Diablo 16:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfuddle

Just changed deletion notice to afd. Personally, I think it needs a rewrite. --nkayesmith 01:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe this to be inappropriate content by any means.
Please note the following VERY similar articles:
along with the very many products listed under Comparison_of_ticket-tracking_systems
I cannot see a quantifiable difference between the articles listed above and this one. --Joshuafrappier 01:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know about the other examples, but Bugzilla is used by a *lot* of open-source software projects (including several really major ones e.g. Mozilla, KDE, Gnome), and Trac seems to be reasonably widely used. ~~Looks like the other ones need to be looked into and possibly AfDed too.~~ - makomk 10:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- And all of the other ones you've listed have respectable numbers of Google hits and decent Alexa rankings (worst around 33,000, best about 7,000). Unfuddle has no Alexa ranking and gets nearly no Google results. - makomk 10:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of an article on X does not justify the existence of an article on Y. X may just be a bad article that no-one had noticed yet. The existence of multiple, non-trivial, published works that are from sources independent of the software's creators are what will justify the existence of this article. I notice that you refused to cite such sources. Please read WP:CORP#Criteria_for_products_and_services, read User:Uncle G/On notability#Tips_for_editors, and cite sources as you were asked to. Uncle G 12:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Tried Googling Unfuddle + various related terms, and couldn't find anything except the official site, the company blog, and a page on the Ruby on Rails wiki that lists various real-life usages of Ruby on Rails. - makomk 10:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to be just spam from a non-notable company. Not at all in the league of the companies cited above by Joshuafrappier. Google shows what looks to me to be a quantifiable difference. I see no evidence that unfuddle passes WP:CORP Brian 19:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)btball[reply]
Delete per WP:CORP. JoshuaZ 15:37, 3 August 2006 (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.