Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NOX renderer

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. L Faraone 02:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NOX renderer

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

Deprodded by creator. Original prod concern was "Software - no proof of notability, fails WP:GNG. Please show on talk why this topic is notable." Nothing has been changed in the article since the prod nom. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There isn't much in the way of reliable sources out there. 3d-sphere.com has a number of articles on the NOX renderer, including two interviews here and here. 3d-sphere.com seems a bit more organized that just a blog, but I don't know if they are considered a reliable source. It may be that this is a case of WP:TOOSOON; there hasn't been enough time for secondary sources to develop. Notable or not, it looks like a nice renderer. --Mark viking (talk) 04:28, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now. I agree that this is WP:TOOSOON. The software is currently in beta. It has few reliable secondary sources at this time. Of course, this may change once the renderer comes out of beta and gets some traction. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 20:54, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There really seems to be very little that could be regarded as coverage in reliable independent sources: most of what is available is clearly promotional in one way or another. (Note: The article was created by a single purpose account, which has edited only about one business and its products.) JamesBWatson (talk) 11:54, 28 March 2013 (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.