Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ACTRAN
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. MBisanz talk 23:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- ACTRAN (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- Queried speedy delete as spam. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – article definitely written as promotion (though not blatant for G11) of a product. That or something that is better explained on their own web site. MuZemike 16:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - this article contains information useful to understand what is Actran, as other articles like Ansys, Comsol, OpenFOAM and hundreds of others. The specificity of this (commercial) product is explained, and this information is useful to anyone interested in simulations, eg to decide whether it is scientifically appropriate to tackle a specific problem. Wikipedia is the best place to put this type of information because it is the only way to have at last an objective statement on how exactly this product should be defined, thanks to the feedback of the community (which is allowed to edit if anything is wrong, not?). It is by no means in contradictions with the rules listed in their own web site, to quote MuZemike: a wiki page must live and evolve through the community whereas commercial communication is fed only by the vendor. Fred SC (talk) 17:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - How is it spam? It tells me exactly what it is without any market speak such as, "ACTRAN is the complete solution for the most complex acoustic propagation problems..." Rilak (talk) 11:32, 24 March 2009 (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.