MyWiki:Articles for deletion/Web Platform Installer
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__
- 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator, and there is no support for deletion. (non-admin closure) Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:19, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Web Platform Installer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Is this short lived (~4 years, 2009-2013) niche Microsoft freeware notable? I am not seeing how the article's contents or sources make it meet WP:NSOFTWARE or WP:GNG. BEFORE did not yield anything, all sources I see are either from Microsoft (not independent) or mentions in pasing that fail WP:SIGCOV. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:35, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:35, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:23, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Was able to find sustained significant coverage in secondary sources, including an opinion piece in InfoWorld, news articles in ZDNET and eWeek, and various O'Reilly books. DigitalIceAge (talk) 23:01, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- @DigitalIceAge Thanks. ZDNET seems to be tagged as not always reliable, but other sources seem fine, and I see you already expanded them article with them. I am happy to withdraw this nom. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:11, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- Per WP:RS/P, pre-October 2020 ZDNET articles are considered reliable. It's only the articles that were published after September 2020, when Red Ventures bought it from CBS Interactive and promptly ran it into the ground, that are not. (And now they might be considered reliable again since they got re-acquired by Ziff Davis in August 2024? Just found that out.) DigitalIceAge (talk) 02:27, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- @DigitalIceAge Thanks. ZDNET seems to be tagged as not always reliable, but other sources seem fine, and I see you already expanded them article with them. I am happy to withdraw this nom. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:11, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- 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.