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 no consensus. SpinningSpark 12:02, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RenderDoc[edit]

RenderDoc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Was merged to Crytek as a result of the earlier discussion. However, a discussion on that talk page indicates that the merge may not have been the best course of action, see Talk:Crytek/Archives/2019#RenderDoc merger. However, the consensus of the last AfD was that this was not notable on their own. This does gets mentions, but not enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:GNG. Currently, it is sourced by trivial mentions and primary sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RenderDoc and it's use is discussed often regarding things like when implementing graphics pipelines, programming APIs or game engines, particularly in video game industry. It is notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Ipr1 (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Found:

https://www.imaginationtech.com/blog/renderdoc-gains-powervr-support/ and https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/211880/Crytek_is_giving_away_its_new_Renderdoc_graphics_debugger_for_free.php

Which is not much but a start. – K4rolB (talk) 17:13, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: K4rolB: The first link you have there is a WP:NEWSBLOG and the second is full of "Crytek claims" and is essentially a rephrasing of https://www.cryengine.com/renderdoc, which leads me to believe it's not independent enough to qualify for GNG. Ipr1: vague WP:ITSNOTABLE arguments (simply saying "it's notable" without backing it up with policy or sources) are almost never enough to justify a !vote, though I'm guilty of the same thing too in the past so I'm not blaming you. With that aside, nothing in the sources appears to meet GNG, and the arguments put upthread aren't convincing me otherwise. casualdejekyll (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additional references seem to be in Unreal for Mobile and Standalone VR (doi:10.1007/978-1-4842-4360-2_8) and Physically Based Shader Development for Unity 2017 (doi:10.1007/978-1-4842-3309-2_17), though the pages available on Google Books preview don't have too much useful info (based on the index, it seems like there's more info on page 288 of the VR one, not sure about the Unity one) and don't wish to buy those chapters. --Pokechu22 (talk) 20:07, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interview with original author: [1]. Referenced in book on computer vision [2] Ipr1 (talk) 20:22, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep thanks to additional references shared above. NemesisAT (talk) 19:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of debuggers. RenderDoc is clearly significant in the gaming world, but most of the sources on the page are blogs/PR. There isn't enough significant coverage of RenderDocs from reliable sources. Books only mention it without going in depth [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Fails WP:GNG. Heartmusic678 (talk) 16:58, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• It should be noted that there was a prior nomination for this article. The result was merge to Crytek. However, this was in 2018, and the merged version was substantially weaker than the version that exists now (which has many more references). jp×g 01:28, 22 August 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.