Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SWAD (software)
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 keep. LFaraone 00:25, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- SWAD (software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Declined CSD. No indication for notability. Only primary sources. Promotional. Dewritech (talk) 08:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:49, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have tried to improve the article with references to several publications outside SWAD and the University of Granada. --Acanas (talk) 10:52, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A little better. Still needs to have inline links taken out. I say keep for now at least while an effort is in progress to show independent notability. Anyone speak Spanish to verify? W Nowicki (talk) 23:04, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The system has a niche target so there aren't really reviews in the normal sense. There are a few articles from when it was released that mostly reproduce the PR [1], but these three are useful [2] [3] [4]. Searching GScholar yields a lot of results; some are passing mentions and a large number of papers are from people in the UGR (which I don't think makes them automatically non-independent, but I won't push it), but they're not all: from the University of Costa Rica [5] (already in the article, but with the PDF hosted at OpenSWAD), and also [6] [7], [8] provide enough independent commentary to build an article — Frankie (talk) 14:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 14:52, 22 May 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.