Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bibledit

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. Daniel (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bibledit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Doesn't meet WP:NSOFT. Zero independent reliable sources covering the subject. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I've noticed that the creator of this article tried to delete article by blanking it, but other editors didn't let him. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:03, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: My search yielded no sources that allow this subject to clear NSOFT. Checking the article history and the article creator's talk page, they agreed that this subject did not meet Wikipedia's notability standard in 2016 while regretting the failure of a PROD. Their blanking in 2022—nine years after creating the article—suggests someone with subject-matter expertise believes this article should be deleted but didn't know how to go about doing that. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:28, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After so many years the article still does not meet the guidelines set by Wikipedia, so yes, I tried to delete it by blanking it, but that didn't work out. The article still does not meet the guidelines now, so my opinion on deletion has not changed since. Teus (talk) 07:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article fails the relevant notability requirements (WP:GNG, WP:NSOFT, WP:NCORP). Given the age of the software it is possible that there is significant coverage in reliable sources that aren't easily accessible, but I couldn't find anything by looking on Newspapers.com, archive.org, GBooks, or through any similar searches. All of the websites that discuss the subject are associated with the subject or are discussing the subject because they use it (or are simple database entries for Linux distro's repos). I did find a 2007 PC World article but it was a trivial mention of the software as an example of the types of software that could be installed on Ubuntu that provided no real information other than the name. It's possible sources exist, but if so I have not been able to find any. - Aoidh (talk) 02:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably Delete -- Bible translation is an important subject, as the Bible is the most widely translated book of all. Accordingly, software designed to assist in translation ought to be notable, if widely used. Its use will probably mainly not be related to English but to languages with little or no native literature. A leading body in this is SIL international, a link to whose log in page is among the references. However this page does not mention this program, which makes me think it is obsolete. If so, the question is whether to keep it as historical or to delete as obsolete. Peterkingiron (talk) 12:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If sources can be found that shows that it was at one time widely used (in a way that meets Wikipedia:Notability (software)#Inclusion) and that information can be verified with third-party sources I'm all for keeping the article, but I couldn't find any third-party references that discussed this software in any significant way. - Aoidh (talk) 13:28, 24 December 2023 (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.