Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DotProject

: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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

=[[DotProject]]=

:{{la|DotProject}} – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{findsources|DotProject}})

Proposed deletion contested by an IP number. Non-notable, non-consumer SourceForge software project, part of the "project management" spam slough. Google News Archive yields nothing that looks like significant coverage in a reliable source for [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=dotproject%2Bsourceforge&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&scoring=a dotproject+sourceforge]; the closest that comes to that is a single mention in a comparison article in Dr. Dobbs' Journal. A news search for "DotProject" alone will yield many results for DOT project, but nothing in the first several pages for this. Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 11:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 11:58, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep: Per [http://books.google.com/books?id=XS8K8OydSEcC&pg=PA122&dq=dotProject+software&ei=Dt_YSrGBGYeENMPPzIIP#v=onepage&q=dotProject%20software&f=false], [http://books.google.com/books?id=D6sGjfl5htkC&pg=PA128&dq=dotProject+software&ei=Dt_YSrGBGYeENMPPzIIP#v=onepage&q=dotProject%20software&f=false], [http://books.google.com/books?id=uICMLDbOC54C&pg=PT166&dq=dotProject+software&ei=Dt_YSrGBGYeENMPPzIIP#v=onepage&q=dotProject%20software&f=false], and [http://books.google.com/books?id=ntR2Yprl4JwC&pg=PA176&dq=dotProject+software&lr=&ei=i9_YSvvtEo_YNeHqoP8O#v=onepage&q=dotProject%20software&f=false]. Joe Chill (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

:*Comment - Yes, it does appear that this is also listed in a number of books. They appear to mostly be entries in printed directories listing free business applications. Again, I would question whether this is evidence of enough interest outside the specific field to confer notability. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 13:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep I agree with Joe Chill, the books make it notable. Dream Focus 01:29, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep since potentially useful, free software should always have a place in WP. The article alone may attract others who can improve it, or upon it. -MBHiii (talk) 15:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

: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.