[WikiEN-l] CSD A7 and software programs

[Anthony]

On 1/14/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> RoboGeo: the sources include two articles that are not written by its
> creators.
> One of those is even a book.

Well, the originally CSDed article didn't contain those sources.  The
current article does.

However, this seems to suggest that any article which doesn't contain
two sources (or at least claim that two sources exist) is a CSD.  In
that respect it seems too easy to remove any article (speedily, at
that) by wikilawyering about lack of sources.

> I don't like how there's little content there
> and how it has a big "download here" sign, but I'd give it a chance due to
> the fact it has independant sources.
>
> The software guidelines probably need to be stricter and more specific so
> for example random flash games without a lot of visitors and/or a widespead
> cult status are excluded.
>
They also need to be a lot less strict for software which does
something useful, in my opinion.  [[RoboGEO]] doesn't seem like it
would pass [[WP:SOFTWARE]] by any stretch of the imagination (it most
likely isn't the subject of any published works aside from some
websites, and it's Windows software so it has no prayer of being
included in a major operating system distribution).

Of course, maybe there is a consensus that only the most famous
software programs belong in Wikipedia.  If that's true, then
WP:SOFTWARE should just be made a policy, as opposed to a proposed
guideline, and people who wish to write wiki articles about non-famous
software can move somewhere else.  Incidentally, does anyone know of
some good wikis that definitely do allow this sort of thing?

Anthony