Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ShixxNOTE (2nd nomination)

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:57, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ShixxNOTE

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

Poorly sourced, no hint of notability found apart from product reviews. Kleuske (talk) 12:13, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I will look for some sources later (other than those weak ones mentioned in the previous AfD, not much after a brief search so far), but the article reads like an advert (comments in the pictures are priceless...). Pavlor (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found three books where ShixxNOTE program is mentioned: "Implementing NAP and NAC Security Technologies", "Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Digital" and "Blackjacking: Security Threats to BlackBerry Devices, PDAs, and Cell". All three books are talking about bug overflow security flow in program. I as a developer of ShixxNOTE program immediately released security update when that bug was discovered by Luigi Auremma. This books are about security, networks, ports, how everything works and how person can use program like mine (before security update) to get access of other computer or other device. This is written in that books so you can not remove article about ShixxNOTE. You can just add that in the program previous versions there was security issue. So again I am against deletion of ShixxNOTE article. It is notable and it is on Wikipedia more than 10 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirola (talk • contribs) 11:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not even a passing mention (entry in list in all three books). Not broad enough coverage to estabilish notability. Pavlor (talk) 12:29, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable - I did attempt to find some sources to add to the page, but found zilch. A nicely made page that is wp:too soon or simply too obscure. 68.173.149.120 (talk) 18:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Searches for sources indicate that this does not meet the inclusion criteria in Wikipedia:Notability (software) and the general notability guideline. Sam Sailor 18:21, 23 May 2018 (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.