Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CPFD Software

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 delete. No valid (in terms of our guidelines) argument for retention was made. Sandstein 20:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CPFD Software

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

Delete. Non-notable company. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CPFD is a notable company in that they are the only simulation company to accurately model fluid-particle flows. This is accomplished through solving the coupled Eulerian and Lagrangian equations simultaneously through time sequencing. And article should be started on the software package Barracuda that accomplished this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.234.227.4 (talk) 20:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notability should be demonstrated by significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Could you give some examples? Also, the request for another article is outside the scope of AfD; that should be done at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Chris the Paleontologist (talk • contribs) 01:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Has anybody read the scholarly papers cited on the article? Do they reference CPFD Software in detail? Otherwise, there's not much online, just this sort of thing. Notability seems marginal. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked the full text of those sources, and can find no mention of "CPFD" in either apart from notes saying that some of the authors are employed by that company, and there is no mention at all of "Barracuda". Phil Bridger (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:CSD § A7. Per WP:NCORP we assume organization notable once we have proof that it is discussed in independent reliable sources as company; that is, notability of company's founders, employees, products and offices doesn't affect the notability of company in terms of Wikipedia article inclusion guidelines. Still the only statement one could take for implication of this company's notability in the article is the statement about its product, so I have to conclude that the article contains no minimal claim of company's notability. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:22, 17 March 2012 (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.