Deletion of Rtmpdump

Comment: I suppose it squeeks by . But in truth I could just as easily live with a merge to RTMP
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSOFT)

Comment: mdash; Tough call. The article is obviously poorly written and ought to be revamped by someone with expertise in the field of computer sciences (or who is otherwise familiar with that application), but a single https://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4RNWN_enCA217CA221&q=rtmpdump+%22andrej+stepanchuk%22 Google search shows several |independent sources that demonstrate the moderately widespread use of this peripheral. I'm open to reconsidering this position if someone with more knowledge relating to the subject asserts otherwise
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: I found and added three sources, PCLinuxOS, with a decent tutorial and review of the software package, and two academic research paper (use case mentions), and rewrote the lead para. Domain experts can be considered reliable. Based on this, source-ability has been shown. Since  suggests not AfD'ing if sources can reasonably be found, or can reasonably be expected to be findable, I feel comfortable keeping. I'm checking out some blogs and Usenet postings (Google groups) for domain expertise. If it's deleted, please '''userfy''' under my userpage
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: per sources in the article, combined with http://chillingeffects.org/N/25159 unambiguous notability claim from Adobe and technical significance notion of . I'm not opposed to merging it to RTMP outcome, as there isn't much to discuss in the article though. I only prefer keeping it separate because building a collection of software in the article about protocol isn't particularly bright idea IMO. —&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSOFT)