Talk:Player Project

Delete
It is proposed that this article be deleted, because of the following concern:

No indication of notability. Appears to be just a promotion for the project If you can address this concern by improving, copyediting, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article, or if you otherwise object to deletion of the article for any reason. To avoid confusion, it helps to explain why you object to the deletion, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, it should not be replaced.


 * You don´t know what are you talking about. So, include delete in Player/Stage_Project, delete now from the page or include a merge. And delete also Microsoft Robotics Studioor merge them in a common article. If you want I can merge Microsoft Robotics Studio and Player Project. --Altermike 06:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Against deletion or merger. P/S/G is currently the de facto standard tool used in the robotics community, both for simulation and physical robots. I can't think of a more notable robotics platform than this. Jiuguang Wang (talk) 21:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Against deletion or merger too. It is the main open source competitor to Microsoft Robotics Studio and used by many labs. As such it is relevant. --Iv (talk) 10:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Added external references to satisfy 'notability' guidelines. Removing notability and reference warnings from article.  Rmattes (talk) 05:14, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ideally the "significant coverage" for notability will be independent of the subject. The papers you cite are authored by the developers. Marasmusine (talk) 10:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * According to Google Scholar the first reference has been cited 796 times. Many papers using P/S have appeared in all the major conferences and journals. How many and which citations do you require as evidence of notability? (26 Feb 2011) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasquatchp (talk • contribs) 20:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That is a high number of citations, so I will give the benefit of the doubt for now, thanks. Marasmusine (talk) 08:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)