Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AcoustID

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 keep. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:59, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AcoustID

[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)

It fails WP:NMUSIC as per article. ----Rdp060707|talk 10:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. ----Rdp060707|talk 10:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:01, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Extremely curt nomination with no evidence of WP:BEFORE. While the claim is it fails WP:NMUSIC that assumes is is in-scope for that criteria, I'm not immediately convinced it is. On quite interesting note is MusicBrainz has a specific mention at NMUSIC, and then at the MusicBrainz article AcoustID and Chromaprint are specifically mentioned (albeit uncited) in the context of fingerprinting. Should a competent and diligent BEFORE have picked this up, and perhaps also that the Chromaprint algorithm is perhaps the more important related topic. In all events nom. seems in good standing, albeit seemed to have a high rate of reverting problematic edits, possibly an indicator of automation, and their talk page had lots of unsigned (by others) discussions. In passing note I've added (Chikanbanjar, 2017) to the article and claim RS towards GNG/SIGCOV Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:59, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 15:34, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Djm-leighpark and WP:HEY. While this is a music related topic, it doesn't fit under any of the NMUSIC SNG descriptors. It also doesn't fit under WP:NCORP as it's not tied to a company and is an open source free web service. As such, our default policy guideline in this case is GNG and I agree with Djm-leighpark that SIGOV has been met with the addition of the sources recently added. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep; easily passes WP:SIGCOV in this case. Worth looking at WP:NSOFTWARE which isn't a policy, but relevant as well if it didn't pass GNG. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:15, 10 September 2021 (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.