Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of PaintShop Pro releases

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:55, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of PaintShop Pro releases

[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)

Violates WP:NOTCHANGELOG as it's almost entirely sourced to jasc.com, corel.com or paintshoppro.com, all WP:PRIMARY sources. Does not demonstrate standalone notability. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:51, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:51, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete Lol, so much of WP:NOT is highly specific and over time much of it is interpreted more broadly at AFD as the project developed, but this is a rare instance of a really damn obvious violation of this. Reywas92^Talk 04:37, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to PaintShop Pro#History per the reasons above. Should be redirected though because the article does get around 1,000 views per month. I mean, the notice of the "main article" at the top says it all. Sam-2727 (talk) 14:37, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Concurr that it violates WP:NOTCHANGELOG.Knox490 (talk) 00:23, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a directory or catalogue of every single version release for a particular software. Ajf773 (talk) 02:50, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The page in question is an instance of mass copyright violation. Its contents has been often copied verbatim from its sources. See Wikipedia:Copyright violations for details. Seeing this, I ask myself, what made Wikipedia contributors spend time adding and maintaining this rapidly aged pile of text to Wikipedia. Is it really important for us (let alone the next generation) to know that PaintShop Pro 10.1 added "new support for Raw files from Nikon D50, Canon EOS Kiss Digital N, Olympus E-1/E-10/E-20 cameras"? In fact, so important as to infringe on copyright? Or maybe, they were so unimportant that contributors did not bother rewriting them in their own words. flowing dreams (talk page) 05:01, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I agree with Flowing Dreams. Barca (talk) 14:22, 4 September 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.