Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PHPulse

PHPulse

A web software tool. The author cheerfully admits to a COI and clearly thinks that he is exempt from providing reliable sources. Is it a notable product? Sgroupace (talk) 05:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:Notability (software) Equendil Talk 05:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Delete per a historical page? —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete as spam. Otherwise, just plain delete as failing the notability and verifiability policies and guidelines. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article shouldn't remain unless reliable sources are added. Google didn't tell me very much, but I did notice one forum thread from April 2007. Unfortunately forum posts aren't reliable sources, so more study would have to be done by someone who wanted to keep the article. Since PHP is a fairly mature technology, and PHPulse was created in 2001, it is conceivable that this product may have been covered somewhere in books or articles, if it is notable. EdJohnston (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:N/WP:PRODUCT; there simply isn't any substantial coverage out there. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Googlecode project recently deleted and moved to Sourceforge. Projects is in process of being moved entirely to Sourceforge. Searching on ENGLISH google presents lots of references to the framework but try Phillipines, Germany and France. The project is very popular in other countries due to early support fo internationalization within framework. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phpulse (talk • contribs) 21:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC) Some entries of note easily found within Google (and not added by myself) www.dzone.com/links/rss/the_fastest_php_based_mvc_framework.html, [[1]], [[2]], [Freshmeat entry], [[3]], [[4]]. The mentions are all over the place and it is mirrored everywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phpulse (talk • contribs) 00:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is good that you found some Google hits, but none of them are what Wikipedia considers to be reliable sources. We'd like to see reviews in publications, such as magazines or books. It is also good to have mentions on edited web sites that maintain a reporting staff, such as http://www.zdnet.com or http://www.cnet.com. Blogs and forum postings generally can't be used. EdJohnston (talk) 03:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Magazines and Books, huh? You mean like this sourceforge project which has none of and is a wikipedia page [[5]]??? Again... I have followed other project examples. Plenty of other open source projects exist on wikipedia without magazine publications and with minimal references. If this is an issue, and indeed I don't meet the guidelines, then indeed we should delete my page and all other open source project pages which fail to have anything in print as well. Please start this crusade... or better yet. I'll help if this is what wikipedia insists is proper editor behaviour. I'll be more than happy to start enforcing and marking ANY page that does NOT have anything in PRINT as deletable and SPAM. Unfortunately, I think you will find that a rather hard rule to enforce in an age of the internet. But if that's why you are going to delete this entry, then please be so kind as to enforce the rule en masse.