InstallAnywhere : Moreover, the absence of proper citations or references to substantiate the information presented further weakens its credibility.  Additionally, the article fails to adhere to the guidelines set forth in WP:NPRODUCT , which are necessary for a standalone article.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 10:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:59, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of installation software : I wasn't able to find any independent SIGCOV.  Owen× ☎ 12:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If the article is deemed not notable and lacks reliable sources, redirecting it may not be the most appropriate course of action.  The purpose of the List of installation software article is to feature notable and significant entries.  Therefore, it is advisable to remove articles that do not meet these criteria, rather than redirecting them.  This ensures the list maintains its intended purpose and showcases genuinely noteworthy content.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 13:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirects do not need to be notable .  If they are a likely search term, and have a relevant redirection target article, they should be kept.  And our notability standards for inclusion in a list are far more lax than they are for a standalone article.  The items listed under List of installation software need to be verifiable .  They don't have to meet WP:NSOFT or WP:GNG.  Owen× ☎ 13:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I understand and respect your viewpoint, but I maintain the belief that removal remains the optimal solution.  In my opinion, it is not appropriate for an article (about which there is not a single reliable source, i.e. cannot be verified), to be redirected to another Wikipedia article.  Additionally, there are numerous articles on this list that may also need to be removed due to ambiguity surrounding their notability.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 19:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There are two problems with your view, Barseghian Lilia .  Firstly, a redirect is not an article .  List of installation software is an article.  A redirect to it is nothing but a search term that takes the reader to the article List of installation software .  Individual items on a list are not required to meet our notability guidelines.  Secondly, there are reliable sources that mention InstallAnywhere: [14] , [15] , and others.  They do not provide significant coverage, but they do establish verifiability for the product, which is all we need for including the product in a list.  It's nice of you to say you respect my viewpoint, but deletion discussions are based on policy and guidelines, and so far you failed to point which policy or guideline prompts you to claim that this software cannot even be mentioned in a list.  Owen× ☎ 20:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Perhaps my previous explanation was not clear enough.  If we consider the history of editing of List of installation software and the discussions on the talk page , it can be inferred that there exists a certain level of soft consensus regarding the inclusion of only those items in the list that have their own dedicated articles on the English Wikipedia.  The editors often refer to rules WP:WTAF , WP:NOTDIR , WP:LSC in support of this ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 etc.).  Consequently, if the article in question is removed, it would also be removed from the list, rendering any redirection to it just inappropriate.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 10:32, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] FWIW Barseghian Lilia , InstallAnywhere was created in July 2007, and the very first revision of List of installation software https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=List_of_installation_software&oldid=196700606 in the beginning of March 2008, already DID contain reference to IA (InstallAnywhere).  I've never had to add it myself, all that I did was to reflect the ownership change.  -- Vlad | -> 14:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Delete as a nominator.  Based on the current situation, it is necessary to remove the article.  This action is prompted by the absence of reliable independent sources to support its content.  Additionally, it should be remove from the List of installation software article and other places, rather than redirecting it.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 13:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC) — Duplicate ! vote: Barseghian Lilia ( talk • contribs )  has already cast a ! vote above.  [ reply ] Redirect to List of installation software (thank you Owen× , I wouldn't have thought at this possibility being a deletionist myself); User:Barseghian Lilia , as OwenX has pointed out, there ARE sources about this niche software.  Unfortunately, it's been more than 10 years since I've last used it (as a developer) and only recently saw it used by a software installed by myself, so I cannot help more in order to keep it as an standalone article.  -- Vlad | -> 09:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin : Vlad ( talk • contribs )  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD .  [ reply ] Hey Barseghian Lilia why do you keep misleading?!? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=InstallAnywhere&action=history I'm NOT the creator of this article, just by accident the person who contributed the most, and that... 16 years ago!  -- Vlad | -> 09:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Dear Vlad, I apologize for my inattention.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 09:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep After consulting the article history (not much in the last 10 years, but it's better than nothing), and not because I contributed a long time ago, but I do change my vote, it's an established 20 years old multi platform installation software, not known probably just because of that (i.e. that's not Windows-oriented like InstallShield) but there are people actively using it, there used to be a community around it, probably still is.  -- Vlad | -> 14:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It seems that there is an established consensus to remove the article due to the lack of reliable sources and substantial coverage, which is one of the main criteria for all articles, and we now determine the need for redirection.  My suggestion is to delete the article and refer the issue of creating a redirect to a new separate discussion.  Barseghian Lilia ( talk ) 15:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It seems that you've got something personally with the article itself (as a side note, after creating a completely new article from scracth, did you choose from the more than 6 milion articles en.wiki has, this one in particular, and propose it to deletion?!?) I understand you're a somewhat new user, but you're going a little too fast IMHO: ok, it's your right to nominate the article for deletion, but there's another user (not me) that pointed out that there are in fact external references for IA; while initially agreeing to transform it into redirect, I changed my mind and voted to keep it.  Why?  Because while I haven't touched it in years, I realized that stuff that I'd added eons ago, when deleted, someone else readded it, so in a way agreeing that it's better than nothing.  Counting me, there are exactly 3 users that opinated, each one with a different opinion, where do you see "established consensus"?!? -- Vlad | -> 17:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of installation software An item on a list does not need to be notable.  Also, maybe add a short section or sentence about this to the software package that inherited its user base.  Llajwa ( talk ) 16:22, 25 January 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: redirect