Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project Manager (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. Shimeru (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Project Manager (software)

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

Promotion for non-notable software product. I have not found any coverage beyond press releases and incidental mentions, which is also all the article gives. Haakon (talk) 05:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have personally used this software and I don't see why you would delete it. It is just as much a valid product as any of the other products that are listed as project management software. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.110.122 (talk • contribs) — 76.180.110.122 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Non-notable software or website, does not meet the product or the website notability guidelines. Claim for notability seems to revolve around the notion that something else used to be at their website, not the current content. That's an original twist. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KeepThis software is widely used in the Project Management sphere, it has been reviewed by Microsoft and included in their partnership program, has been written about (favorably for the most part..) in PM Magazine, and has been featured in Gartner -March 2010 which is a highly respected publication but not having a copy I couldn't cite actual references. This is more than many who are already in wikipedia. Some examples of less notability are; FogBugz, Redmine, TaskJuggler ect...

I believe notability can be proved for this software due to the high number of users and offline articles - need time to retrieve these. Rachnzl (talk) 22:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Review of the sources supplied in article reveals the following: PR placements (Marketwire, etc.) and trivial coverage. Sources are also not consistent with the article in their description of what this site/product is -- one source describes it as a "portal" for project managers, for example. I promise to revisit this AfD in a few days to see if Rachnzl has dug up reliable sourcing (I was unable to do so). Clearly, this entity exists, but it doesn't appear notable in any way. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 06:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong KeepI have used this software for a couple of companies I have consulted for and it deserves to be listed. I don't understand the strong bias to remove it when it is a legitimate product. Maybe those who disagree should download a copy for themselves and try it out. Or maybe they are competitors who are trying to eliminate the competition... PamelaG52 —Preceding unsigned comment added by PamelaG52 (talk • contribs) — PamelaG52 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

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.