Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BigBlueButton


 * 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. The "keep" !votes do not address the issue of objective notability. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

BigBlueButton

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Promotion for non-notable software product. I have not found any coverage of the product or project at all. Haakon (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep Being an inclusionist and a software architect I tend to like these kinds of articles as they enrich Wikipedia but not necessarily violate WP:NOTMANUAL. Its an interesting and sucessful product, which brings together a number of well know open source products, and clearly demonstrates that Open Source products work. I think it should be expanded heavily and wikifield. scope_creep (talk) 22:30, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand where you're coming from, but liking the article is usually not a keep reason, and it's not up to Wikipedia to promote open source. Some sources would help the article, if they exist. Haakon (talk) 16:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Unambiguous advertising: BigBlueButton (BBB) enables universities and colleges to deliver a high-quality learning experience to remote students. BigBlueButton supports sharing of slides (PDF and PPT), whiteboard, chat, video, voice (using Asterisk), and desktops. It is built using over fifteen open source components, runs on Windows, Linux, Unix, and Mac computers. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * delete Self promotion, non-notable, apparently still half-baked. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep The article does need to be improved (which I started), however, this is clearly a leader for an open source app in this software class. Marclaporte (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete While it may be interesting and innovative, it hasn't received enough significant coverage in third-party sources to establish notability. (The only references that may be third-party are from a publication called "Open Source Business Resource", whose site is timing out right now, so I can't evaluate the quality of the references or the publication itself. But the blurb on Google calls it a "Free monthly publication for Canadian business owners", which does not sound particularly impressive.) SheepNotGoats (talk) 18:07, 23 August 2010 (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.