Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PuppetMaster (software) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/PuppetMaster_(software)

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. Max Semenik (talk) 19:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PuppetMaster (software)

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

This article fails to comply with Wikipedia:Notability as it fails to introduce significant coverage in reliable secondary sources.

I tried to look for sources but the first page of Bing results did not yield anything, even though I searched +"PuppetMaster". A Softpedia download page shows that only version 1.0 of this product is ever released, once in 2004.[1] Fleet Command (talk) 09:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - unreferenced software article with no indication of notability. Dialectric (talk) 19:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Unreferenced. No indication of notability. Couldn't find significant coverage or anything to grant notability. Pit-yacker (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I found this, but one source is not enough. SL93 (talk) 01:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - I added a reliable, tertiary book source to the article. The article is now referenced. Perhaps more sources can be found.

Flickenger, Rob; Weeks, Roger (2003). "Wireless hacks". Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly. ISBN 0596005598. Retrieved January 10, 2012.

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:25, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so we now have two passing mentions in secondary sources. I know I should not normally edit other people's messages but I took the liberty of editing your citation for better compliance with Wikipedia standard. ISBN parameter is an extremely useful one. I hope was not an ass. Fleet Command (talk) 13:52, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Flickenger has two of his books used as references in three other articles. [2] This book gets 5 editorial reviews, so notable sources cover it. So its a good source. It doesn't just mention it in passing, but instead goes on about it for a couple of pages. Dream Focus 01:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Five editorial reviews? Link please! Fleet Command (talk) 17:46, 13 January 2012 (UTC)~~[reply]
Okay, I did accepted it in the first place. But here we only have "in secondary source" (singular) while we need "significant coverage" and "sources" (plural) as well. Regards, Fleet Command (talk) 05:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Google book search shows it is covered in Cinefex: Issues 73-75. Cinefex is a notable publication. That makes two reliable sources giving it significant coverage. Dream Focus 01:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see it. Link please! Fleet Command (talk) 17:46, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Now I understand why. I was looking for "PuppetMaster" while you meant Puppet Master which is not relevant to this AfD. Regards, Fleet Command (talk) 05:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What? Click the Google book search at the top of the AFD. Its about the software. Dream Focus 05:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did. Read SL93's reply below. Fleet Command (talk) 07:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete as not notable enough. Cinefex, a film effects magazine, is talking about one of the films, which leaves only one source and not much of that.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 21:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. Its talking about the software used in a movie. Puppetmaster software was used to pull the multiple elements together and animate them as a whole. "Puppetmaster allowed us to animate a CG skeleton, fitting different models over it for each separate part of the effect," Dream Focus 05:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Um, did you read the article? This software does not make special effects. SL93 (talk) 06:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"PuppetMaster is an application for Windows and mobile which enables the mobile phone to be used as a universal remote control for Microsoft Windows." Why do you think that is the same as this? SL93 (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The second source is referring to another software. -- Whpq (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2012 (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.