Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apps for Democracy


 * 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. Close one as one notable mention but the notability guidelkine is clear about the need for multiple sources. Blogs don't cut it. Sorry Spartaz Humbug! 17:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Apps for Democracy

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Declined A7 speedy. Appears to fail WP:N. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as speedy tagger. Plus, the hangon rationale states quite clearly that, while the article is not written in a promotional tone, the reason for its creation is promotional. The creator cited newspapers mentioning this event, but without mentioning dates or article titles. Google returns a gazillion blog hits, but little or no actual reliable sources. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 18:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

 * Keep.Thanks for notes. The Apps for Democracy has been mentioned in the following reliable sources:


 * Mashable, November 11, 2008
 * Garner's Blog Network, Andrea DiMaio, November 13, 2008
 * Government Technology, November 13, 2008
 * Washington Post, Monday, November 24, 2008; Page D01
 * Press Conference about Apps for Democracy by the Mayor of the District of Columbia, Adrian Fenty, November 14, 2008

Why the heck would you ever want to delete an article about a contest that uses open source software, is open to everyone, works toward a goal of citizen participation, and saves the government money. Some of this years winning entries used Wikipedia Content.

Whoisjohngalt (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The good intentions of the contest have nothing to do with notability. I can't find substantial coverage of this "annual event" thats seems to have happened once. If needs to be important enough for substantial coverage by media otherwise it's not notable enough to be included here. Sorry. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Vivek Kundra, the District of Columbia's CTO, is working with President-elect Barack Obama's transition team develop new ways to use technology and he is pointing to this contest to show how open source applications can be applied at the federal level. Mr. Kundra of his his APPS for Democracy contest as a success story. The District sponsored the contest with $50,000 in prize money. Contestants were asked to creative applications that put to use the District's 200 + real time databases. The result was 47 applications that District employees and residents can use everyday. The applications (that can be downloaded and used by anyone) include everything from a link for your iPhone that tells you the crime reports for where you are standing, as well as where the nearest Metro Station is located. Another gives historic tours of the city, including tons of information about the inaugural parade route (this is notable). The District now owns the full rights to these 47 applications, all for $50,000. If these applications went out to bid, it would have cost the taxpayers of the district of Columbia approximately $2.7 Million dollars.

Whoisjohngalt (talk) 15:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That all sounds fabulous. Can it be added to the article with citations to the media accounts verifying this information?ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. "Notable" is an adjective meaning important and deserving attention, because very good or interesting. Cambridge Dictionaries Online Apps for Democracy has been discussed in over 3700 blogs. Google Search Results That, in itself, is substantial coverage by media and makes it notable. More relevant is that it provides important information and deserves attention by both DC residents and visitors. It presents useful information, not elsewhere found in one place, by having contributors manipulate and present the same data from different viewpoints and agendas. The users can then extrapolate the information relevant and important to them.

Papalew (talk) 19:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC) — Papalew (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * This comment was the user's first edit. SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:15, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * We are not Cambridge Dictionaries Online; we are Wikipedia. MuZemike  ( talk ) 18:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep This article should not be deleted as it focuses on an important innovation in how governments are sourcing technology through crowd sourcing and open data sharing. Deletion would be a disservice to other citizens and governments who seek to use the Apps for Democracy model for innovation morning forward. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.133.73 (talk) 20:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

corbett3000 (talk) [[User:corbett3000|corbett3000 (talk) 18:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.220.26 (talk)  — 98.218.220.26 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Apps for Democracy is an awesome example of Web 2.0 innovation in Goverment.--Resing (talk) 19:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC) — Resing (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Apps for Democracy has been written about in thousands of blog posts (i.e. it's Notable) and has been on Federal News Radio 1500 AM and WTOP Radio. A 100+ 'most notable' post are |captured here in delicious. Apps for Democracy is being viewed by the media as a possible reason (among many others) for Vivek Kundra's relevancy for CTO of the federal government.

lhooq (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 05:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC). 
 * Keep I've received emails about this organization and never actually knew what they were before seeing the Wikipedia page. I think the page helps to clarify what the competition is, and the range and scope of the competition are wide enough that there is a significant user base who could be assisted by a Wikipedia entry, assuming the entry is not exclusively promotional in tone.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 05:46, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete . I'm seeing no notability in the links provided.  Somebody want to change my mind with some reliable sources?  If not, my !vote stands. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 14:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Changed my !vote, going to weak keep. Add on rewrite, because it really needs it.  Badly.  Good find, RayAYang. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 00:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep 14 Gnews hits, appears to pass WP:N. I agree that the article as it currently exists is promotional and should be cut down, however. RayAYang (talk) 17:34, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep--some of those sources provided on the talk page do indicate some notability. But boy, this is a poorly written article. Drmies (talk) 21:19, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 02:35, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.