Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paintbrush (Software)

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paintbrush (Software)

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

Non notable software. No citations or references. Nothing in article indicates notability. Cynof Gavuf 19:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Ray^Talk 21:03, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - sources can be found about it, such as [1], [2], [3]. It's difficult to find any in-depth coverage, though. Robofish (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if kept, it really needs to be renamed, there are so many more notable pieces of software called "Paintbrush". 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I agree. For example, there has been a program called "Paintbrush" for MS-DOS since the 1980s. Perhaps this could be renamed to Paintbrush (Macintosh software) or something? JIP | Talk 07:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply I do not understand why this is being deleted, the program can be found on a list of Mac software on wikipedia, and yet there was no link to any sort of page, so I created one so that people would be able to get reliable info on the program, but then the article is immediately put up for deletion?? Willowleaf357 (talk) 17:38, 16 April 2010 (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) 00:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. The above sources definitely don't satisfy WP:N. I couldn't find additional coverage in reliable secondary sources. — Rankiri (talk) 14:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)— Rankiri (talk) 14:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see in-depth coverage here. The Softpedia link is a download page, which is practically automatically generated, not a review. The other two blogs have roughly a paragraph each. Pcap ping 16:04, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article should be renamed to something other than Paint (Software), but it should not be deleted. The article just needs to be expanded--Alpha Quadrant (talk) 21:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The sources that have been found aren't significant coverage. Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 00:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Nuujinn (talk) 17:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There is nothing notable about this software and nothing interesting going for it. It's also presumably a generally unknown piece of third-party software for a Mac. Yousou (talk) 19:58, 30 April 2010 (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.