Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keyboard Maestro

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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:23, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboard Maestro

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

Fails WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:05, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I've never really understood the desire to delete information from Wikipedia unless it is inaccurate, but anyway, here are sources I (as its author) quickly found for Keyboard Maestro that are "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject":

Take Control of Automating Your Mac (ebook) (available from Take Control, Amazon, etc)
Automating deeper with Keyboard Maestro article from SixColors (influential Mac web site by Jason Snell and Dan Moren)
Many articles from leancrew "And now it’s all this" web site by influential author drdrang.
A Beginner's Guide To Automating Your Mac With Keyboard Maestro at LifeHacker AU
Keyboard Maestro tutorial series from Evanto Tutorials
Keyboard Maestro screencast tutorials from Mac OS X Screencasts
Keyboard Maestro and Mac Automation tutorials from ScreenCastsOnline

Those were the ones that I found quickly, there are many more references and tutorials, lots on YouTube for example, even ignoring the very active Keyboard Maestro forum (which may or may not be considered independent). All have significant coverage, and all are clearly independent. What is considered "reliable sources" I wont try to speak to.

Hopefully this helps making an informed decision. Sorry if the formatting is not appropriate, feel free to reformat it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterNLewis (talk • contribs) 03:20, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterNLewis:. Are you claiming any or all of these meet WP:RS? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:33, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt if he knows about our intricate web of policies and standards, but yes, he's plainly asserting that these are good and reliable sources, including some by acknowledged experts in the field, and all independent of the article's topic. I think he has identified more than enough sources of high enough quality to demonstrate notability. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per PeterNLewis's sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Passes WP:GNG. Source examples from my WP:BEFORE searches: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:17, 14 June 2017 (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.