Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Products

Note: In some cases there is another, more specific category than this one. If possible, please use one of these instead: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Albums and songs (e.g. CDs and singles) Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Anime and manga (e.g. comic books, DVDs) Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation (same as above) Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Companies Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Games (e.g. board games) Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Literature (e.g. books) Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Software Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Transportation (e.g. cars) Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Video games

Points of interest related to Products on Wikipedia: Category – Deletions

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Products. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Products|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Products. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Products/archive

Verse (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I saw that this article has been tagged for sources since June 2024 and for notability since September 2024, so I checked the existing references, which unfortunately did not indicate notability. In the hope of finding better sources, I made searches, using three different web search facilities, but unfortunately none of them turned up anything helpful. The references in the article are the GitHub download page for Verse; a YouTube video made by the creators of Verse; a site called "VerseWiki", which speaks for itself; a paper with 8 co-authors, 6 of whom are stated to work for Epic Games, the company which created "Verse". None of those is substantial coverage in an independent source. Typical things I found on searching were the Wikipedia article; several pages on the site of Epic Games; a question about "Verse" on Reddit; more YouTube videos, at least some and perhaps all made by the creators of Verse; GitHub again; pages on blogs, Fandom, and web forums. I considered making a PROD, but decided I prefer to bring it to AfD in case someone can find something better than I managed to. (The article was created by a single purpose account, for which the substantial majority of edits were related to Verse, and, if I am not mistaken, only one edit was not related to Epic Games.) JBW (talk) 20:03, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Computing. JBW (talk) 20:03, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:20, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Verse is an important language of the near future, so we should cover it. That said, can we push enough WP:RS past WP:N? It's still (after two years) early days for Verse. There's still pretty much nothing outside Epic about it. Stuff like Lennart Augustsson here: https://gotocph.com/2023/sessions/2896/verse-a-new-functional-logic-language is Epic talking to the outside world about how open Verse is to everyone else, but as yet there's not much take-up of it. Tim Sweeney is pushing it not just because it's his bread and butter as the house language for Unreal, but because he's a language geek too and is interested in Verse's own particular set of foibles being the ones that we should all be favouring over, say, Haskell.

I expect that this will be deleted. But that's because WP's capacity to favour dogma over value is legendary. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:55, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am truly astonished to see an editor with so much experience giving such a pure WP:CRYSTAL argument as "Verse is an important language of the near future". And then to continue with "There's still pretty much nothing outside Epic about it", as part of an argument to keep the article? "There's pretty much no coverage from any independent source" is an argument to delete it. JBW (talk) 22:05, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you bother to read my !vote, or did anything more than linking a WP:WIKICAPS confuse you too much? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:54, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered engaging other users in good faith instead of pretending they didn't read what you wrote? It's not their fault you wrote such a terrible rationale. JBW is 100% spot-on: this is textbook WP: CRYSTAL. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: My WP: BEFORE did not find sufficient sourcing to establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:50, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Any thoughts on a redirect to Unreal Editor for Fortnite? Schützenpanzer (Talk) 23:08, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LiveChat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

The current version of the article is largely written in a promotional tone, with issues of WP:NPOV and WP:NOTADV. It does not demonstrate WP:NOTABILITY, WP:GNG, there is minimal significant coverage in WP:INDY, WP:RS that is both substantial and in-depth. Additionally, it fails WP:NORG and WP:NCORP, as this is an app with limited third-party coverage. Chiserc (talk) 21:19, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Software. Chiserc (talk) 21:19, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think there might be some third party coverage, but it is difficult to find as the name of the software is the same as the name generic term "live chat" ([1]). See also [2]. The issue is that the company is Polish. Katzrockso (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is some third party coverage, but this is mostly too promotional, like a product review or passing mention, and nothing that validates standalone article's notability from secondary, reliable, and in-depth sources. The one example you mention is from a Forbes contributor, a freelance journalist "covering lists for Forbes" https://www.forbes.com/sites/haniyarae/2017/03/30/inside-retails-live-chat-revolution/. As per Wikipedia:FORBESCON, there is a consensus that this not a reliable source, considered as self-published source. Chiserc (talk) 11:00, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:39, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Researcher J. Broadbent has studied LiveChat for educational use: [3], [4]. It was also reviewed by Techradar: [5], although the site's use of affiliate links makes its independence unclear. Notability seems borderline to me. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:23, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It looks like this is the 2nd nomination for this article and there has been no third nomination but I don't know how to correct the AFD box included in this discussion. Any way, we need more editors arguing for specific outcomes here in order to come to some consensus. Or just close this as No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:11, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment (3rd nomination) was original title of 1st nomination according to history, so likely created in error Oreocooke (talk) 21:23, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment (3rd nomination) has been tagged as error Oreocooke (talk) 21:28, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: In addition to the above sources I found a bit of analysis here. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:24, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Characteristic based product configurator (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG; completely unsourced and I could not find any sources that describe this concept in a WP:BEFORE search. This article about a subclass of product configurator appears to be original research.

This article should not be redirected or merged to product configurator because it is not a plausible search term, and there is no useful sourced content to merge. DePRODed in 2011. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:12, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Computing. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:12, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Looks like the page was a direct copy and translation of an Italian Wikiversity page: [6]. No sources on that page either. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 11:17, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That page was originally on the Italian Wikipedia, but it got transferred to Wikiversity in 2016. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We need more arguments here about possible outcomes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:44, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so Soft deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:35, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I also couldn't find any WP:SIGCOV and no references provided by the article. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 03:12, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]