Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titan FTP Server

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. T. Canens (talk) 00:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Titan FTP Server

[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)

Notability. It's software, it exists, it's not in a technically novel field, it brings no new innovations of its own. Fails WP:MILL and WP:NOTDIR. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:17, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - seems promotional, which is against policy. Kirbanzo ^{(userpage - talk - contribs)} 00:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. 94rain ^Talk 01:14, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per all. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:43, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for failing WP:NPRODUCT. The article is substantially identical to a draft repeatedly declined at Articles for creation. The only change is the substitution of sources in favor of one that warns readers about it independence.[1] Run-of-the-mill software without independent references. • Gene93k (talk) 03:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Above editors have said it but it it fails NPRODUCT and lacks notability. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:56, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As the author of this article, my goal was to expand on the Comparison of FTP server software packages by adding a couple of products which I have used - Serv-U FTP Server and Titan FTP Server. Both products have significant time in market and a high number of users. The comparison page is incomplete without them. My additions to that page were removed, citing lack of a Wikipedia article. I've worked on the article, seeking feedback and independent sources. FTP Servers are not exciting products for the press to write about, so independent sources are limited. It should be noted that the Cerberus FTP Server article, the WS_FTP server article and the CompleteFTP article lack any sources aside from the vendor's pages. People do research on Wikipedia, and comparison articles are good sources for that research. If significant options are missing from a comparison article, it's less beneficial to the reader - regardless of whether the additions bring new innovations or are technically novel. The Titan FTP Server article offers several external references, and factual descriptions of the product capabilities. As a user of this product, and past user of other server products in this category, my knowledge could benefit someone doing research. Isn't that what Wikipedia if for? I would like to submit a Serv-U article, as well, but I won't do so until this is resolved. Could someone cite the exact text in this article that seems promotional? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KyleLes (talk • contribs) 15:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sources aren't independent, or aren't reliable, or both. - MrOllie (talk) 15:07, 21 May 2019 (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.