Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PDFescape

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. ✗plicit 01:16, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PDFescape

[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)

This article about a non-notable PDF program should be PROD'd but it has already been PROD'd years ago so it's going to AFD instead. There is not much here to evaluate and it has been tagged with problems for over seven years. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Wyciślik-Wilson, Mark Sofia (2017-10-18). "PDFescape review: Blending desktop and cloud tools, PDFescape aims to be your PDF Swiss Army knife". TechRadar. Archived from the original on 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-23.
  The review's verdict section notes that the pros of PDFescape is that it offers "free online PDF" and "creates PDF from hundreds of file types" while the cons are that the "free version has ads", the "premium version available on subscription rather than outright payment", and "cheaper options available".
2. Lowensohn, Josh (2008-02-13). "PDFescape comes close to replacing Adobe's Acrobat". CNET. Archived from the original on 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-23.
  The review notes: "PDFescape's editing tool feels a lot like a simple desktop application, with a toolbar up top, and a workspace that's set up with a file source list, and a tool pallet. The one major drawback is that there's no zoom toggle, making it a pain to use for general reading unless you're got a monitor with a large horizontal resolution, or don't mind panning with your mouse. Otherwise it's simple, intuitive, and definitely a step up from Adobe Reader if you need to change something on a PDF file and don't want to shell out for Acrobat, or use a third party editor."
3. Battersby, Jeffrey (2021-04-05). "Best free PDF editors in 2021". Tom's Guide. Archived from the original on 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-23.
  This is a 161-word review of PDFescape. The review notes, "You'll have to contend with severely limited font options, however. PDFescape offers five fonts, one of which is a generic 'signature' font that looks nothing like your own signature. But otherwise, you'll find a lot more tools in PDFescape than you will in the typical, bare-bones free PDF editor."
4. Alvarez, Katrina Paola B. (2011-02-21). "Must-Have Business Essentials Bookmark These Apps". BusinessWorld.
  This is a 214-word review of PDFescape. The review notes, "Although its tools are very simple, editing a file in PDFescape may be tricky for those accustomed to working with word processors; the program seems to treat documents as images. Instead of using the familiar i-beam cursor to select text for editing, one must erase it with one tool and then retype with another. This can get tedious for those who intend to change large blocks of text, but you can save some time by copying it to your clipboard first."
5. Eldridge, Andrea (2012-05-04). "Easy ways to Edit PDFs". The Reporter. Scripps Howard News Service. Archived from the original on 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-23.
  The article provides 143 words of coverage of PDFescape. The article notes: "For easy and quick edits, try PDFEscape.com. This handy online PDF editor lets you insert text notes, fill in forms and even create new forms boxes. ... The main drawback to PDFEscape is privacy; you're basically uploading your files to someone else's server."
6. Cox, Dallas (2021-02-18). "7 of the Best Free PDF Editors". Clark Howard. Archived from the original on 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-23.
  This is a 158-word review of PDFescape. The review notes that the pros are "Completely online; no download needed", "No account or sign-in needed to use", and "No trial period or watermarks" while the cons are "File size limit of 10MB or 100 pages" and "No free desktop version, which means you can’t edit PDFs offline".
7. Stachiew, Mark (2007-03-08). "Networthy". Ottawa Citizen. Archived from the original on 2021-04-23. Retrieved 2021-04-23 – via Newspapers.com.
  The review notes, "PDF Escape also offers some PDF editing capabilities you won't find in Adobe Reader, but only in the more expensive Adobe Acrobat software. For example, you can add text and shapes to a PDF document. The service is free, but any files you save or email will have the PDF Escape logo embedded on it. If you want to remove that logo, you'll have to sign up for their premium service, for which you are charged by the number of documents you output."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow PDFescape to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 23:17, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PDFescape passes Wikipedia:Notability (web)#Criteria, which says, "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." Cunard (talk) 23:17, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, even though this article has significant issues. Anton.bersh (talk) 20:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Having reviewed three of Cunard's sources, they do not link to the PDFescape website via affiliate links, hence meeting WP:RS. feminist (talk) 07:47, 1 May 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.