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 merge to ActiveState. (non-admin closure) sst✈ 03:34, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ActivePython[edit]

ActivePython (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I found no significant coverage for this software per WP:N. SL93 (talk) 01:47, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. FallingGravity (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The term "ActivePython" (in quotes) gets 194 hits on books.google.com. I haven't checked every single hit, but it appears most or all of them are genuinely about this software package. scholar.google.com gives 113 hits. Looks to me like WP:RS covering this topic exists. SJK (talk) 07:30, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Draft and userfy at best for now unless it can be better improved before this AfD closes as the current article is still questionable. SwisterTwister talk 05:56, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Clearly notable per the Google Books and Scholar searches spoon-fed by the nomination process. The whole point of Wikipedia is that articles get improved when they are visible to the general public rather than hidden in draft or user space. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:43, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I can find some reliable trade references to this, although it isn't a a major development tool. It does seem about consistent with entries for other similar products. Shritwod (talk) 09:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to either CPython or ActiveState. I checked the GBooks mentions and most are in passing; some of them are just the main program's startup banner, printed. At some point down the list, GBooks just produces Python books, even with the search string in quotes, that don't seem to even mention ActivePython. The GScholar results aren't much better, and largely overlap with the GBooks ones. This product has good rep, but little in-depth coverage, so it would deserve mention in a list of prepackaged CPythons, but not a separate article. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 10:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• merge to ActiveState. There was a time once when this particular package had some significance, as a popular way of deploying a useful Python environment onto Windows, with an installer that worked and without needing to scrape together the useful bits and bobs that Win32 development would need. But that was a long time ago.

Merging to CPython would be a bad idea. This package might include CPython, but that's not to say it has any lasting importance to CPython. Viam Ferream (talk) 14:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that we might make much the same comments here about ActivePerl. Viam Ferream (talk) 14:58, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to ActiveState. I don't see enough here to justify a stand-alone article. There's a number of pre-built python distros; there's nothing in particular about this one that makes it stand out from the crowd. I suspect the same is true for Active Perl, but that's another AfD. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:08, 27 February 2016 (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.