Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reliance SCADA

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. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliance SCADA

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

CSD contested. Not notable software. Promotional. Dewritech (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP BUT IMPROVE When looking at the range of fields where this software is used, I gotta say it’s notable enough. However, I definitely recommend adding some more references.Petr1979 (talk) 10:17, 7 June 2013 (UTC) — Petr1979 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete - Does not seem to meet GNG. Found a minor source though. [1] Just nothing meeting N or GNG as a whole. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The software is used by students at universities for dissertations [2] and scientific organizations for research[3]. The software is sold all around the world [4] and has also many remarkable success stories[5]. Many of them can nicely supplement existing articles on Wikipedia. For example Wiki article Digital_Park can be supplemented by this article[6]. So in my opinion the software is notable enough. I am suggesting to enhance it by a few interesting success stories. Zpilny (talk) 0:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC) — Zpilny (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 00:55, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Hello, I'm an engineer and I've made my dissertation (for Master Degree) with Reliance software. I've graduated the Gheorghe Asachi Technical University of Iași [7] and my Master teacher is Associate Doctor Engineer Luminiţa Scripcariu[8] and the Institution can be contacted on the webpage [9]. My dissertation paper can be found on my personal google drive account shared document link : cover [10] and content [11] . I got all the support from Reliance team when I had questions and I want to thank them for the help. Alex.lungu.eu (talk) 12:58, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 03:29, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Spent a good deal of time looking into this and I'm empty-handed. Article topic doesn't pass the search engine test for notability (the GNG). The bountiful non-English sources on the page are unfortunately all promotional. There are a few that appear to possibly be reliable, such as this article from Automa, but the article is signed to a GEOVAP employee. And the listed Haberortak article is also a promotional checklist of features. The independent sources just aren't there. Please ping me if more (non-English and offline) sources show in the future. czar · · 05:39, 24 June 2013 (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.