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.
Delete. I prodded this article a few months ago for being a "non-notable application" but the article's creator claimed in the edit summary when removing the prod, "GyazMail is the only classical native-GUI alternative to Apple Mail that is still actively supportet and developed". That is not enough to prove that something is notable. A
WP:BEFORE search only found the sources [1] and [2], but those sources are not enough to indicate
WP:NOTABILITY as the second source mentioned only trivially mentions GyazMail. The first source is not significant coverage of the subject so the subject is not notable. -KAP03(Talk • Contributions • Email)
16:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep or Merge. While this one-programmer project has not to-date had the same impact as the late
Phil Katz's
PKZIP, the clock is still ticking for GyazMail. Also, author Goichi Hirakawa, and his 2003-2017 (14 years) accomplishment compares favorably with that of
Steve Dorner's
Eudora's 1988-2006 range (18 years).
Pi314m (
talk)
09:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. I can't see the point why the article about
GyazMail should be deleted. We have also an article about
Trojitá and
Mulberry (email client). Mulberry wasn't actively developed since 2007 and became nowadays completely unusable because of its outdated codebase. Most clients with an article have very likely less users than GyazMail and many of them aren't even actively developed anymore. Besides that, Wikipedia is an electronic encyclopedia, so there is no need to save paper. Actually I perceive these recurring requests for deletion as aggravating and pointless trolling.
Liebeskind (
talk)
15:00, 26 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. A perfectly reasonable nomination when unsourced, but we now have Macworld reviews from 2005, 2008 and 2013 in the article. They aren't huge, but the are neutral and independent and directly related to the product. A product of this longevity that has been noted and reviewed in independent trade publications repeatedly would appear to safely cross the notability threshold.
XymmaxSo let it be writtenSo let it be done13:56, 4 November 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.
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.
Delete. I prodded this article a few months ago for being a "non-notable application" but the article's creator claimed in the edit summary when removing the prod, "GyazMail is the only classical native-GUI alternative to Apple Mail that is still actively supportet and developed". That is not enough to prove that something is notable. A
WP:BEFORE search only found the sources [1] and [2], but those sources are not enough to indicate
WP:NOTABILITY as the second source mentioned only trivially mentions GyazMail. The first source is not significant coverage of the subject so the subject is not notable. -KAP03(Talk • Contributions • Email)
16:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep or Merge. While this one-programmer project has not to-date had the same impact as the late
Phil Katz's
PKZIP, the clock is still ticking for GyazMail. Also, author Goichi Hirakawa, and his 2003-2017 (14 years) accomplishment compares favorably with that of
Steve Dorner's
Eudora's 1988-2006 range (18 years).
Pi314m (
talk)
09:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. I can't see the point why the article about
GyazMail should be deleted. We have also an article about
Trojitá and
Mulberry (email client). Mulberry wasn't actively developed since 2007 and became nowadays completely unusable because of its outdated codebase. Most clients with an article have very likely less users than GyazMail and many of them aren't even actively developed anymore. Besides that, Wikipedia is an electronic encyclopedia, so there is no need to save paper. Actually I perceive these recurring requests for deletion as aggravating and pointless trolling.
Liebeskind (
talk)
15:00, 26 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. A perfectly reasonable nomination when unsourced, but we now have Macworld reviews from 2005, 2008 and 2013 in the article. They aren't huge, but the are neutral and independent and directly related to the product. A product of this longevity that has been noted and reviewed in independent trade publications repeatedly would appear to safely cross the notability threshold.
XymmaxSo let it be writtenSo let it be done13:56, 4 November 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.