Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CMSimple


 * 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. Cbrown1023 talk 00:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

CMSimple

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable software per WP:SOFTWARE - lacks multiple detailed reviews by independent sources. Google gives us only 30 unique hits for CMSimple -wikipedia: Awyong J. M. Salleh 09:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability per WP:SOFTWARE; no evidence of multiple coverage by independent sources. Walton monarchist89 12:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. The above "30 links" is not correct. The actual search at Google.com returns almost a million hits. (The fault in the first search is the inclusion of "num=100" which limits the search to the first 100 hits) The list of sites dedicated to templates and styles for this CMS means it is relatively prevalent. This is a KEEP in my mind. - grubber 19:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: num=100 does not restrict the search to just 100 results. It tells Google to show 100 results per page instead of 10 so I can see more hits on the same page. The million hits figure is non-unique hits - click to page four and the unique ones peter out . Awyong J. M. Salleh 23:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * My bad. I was reading the Google API ("Maximum number of results to include in the search results.") and understood it to mean to limit the search depth. However, a more appropiate search is "-site:wikipedia.org" rather than "-wikipedia". This makes it to 13 pages. I still think this is a notable topic. - grubber 01:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There are a considerable number of sites that mirror Wikipedia. Awyong J. M. Salleh 01:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. CMSimple was awarded "Empfehlung Der Redaktion" in Internet Professionell 7/2004. CMSimple got 4 out of 5 stars in .net issue 118! So it is regarded by the Computing press. It is supported by a forum with 1062 registered users who have posted 25893 articles in the four support languages EN, FR, DE, DK. A Google on cmsimple phpbb gets 61,300. It is customisable to work in any language. A book has been published in Danish to support it, ISBN: 87-7843-711-3. There are 93 licensed resellers in 18 countries, though itself id AGPL Open Source.. It is a internationally significant piece of software. ClemRutter 00:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Where are the sources for your claims? Do add them into the article. Awyong J. M. Salleh 00:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sources- goto the website www.cmsimple.dk or www.cmsimple.dk/forum for the stats. I have provided content for the helpfiles (no commercial benefit)so am familiar with the package.ClemRutter 00:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes I could add to the article- I will add it to the to do listClemRutter 00:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Google hits are interesting -wikipedia distorts the results. All sites that are running open source are obliged to leave a tag in the template source code that says Powered by CMSimple this can be searched for. A standard search for CMSimple will mainly bring up the developers sites and discussion on the package- as all CMSimple sites contain significantly similar Template code around the unique content, I surmise that Google takes all 930000 pages it found as being 'too similar to report'. Users who have bought a commercial licence have bought the right to remove 'CMSimple' from the Template so it will not show up in Google search.ClemRutter 00:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article needs expansion not deletion. There are a multitude of CMS's available and trying to decide which to implement is better if there are decent reviews / comparisons. Elwell 12:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Wikipedia is not a CMS software directory. There's always Softpedia and the rest. Awyong J. M. Salleh 13:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with the sentiment, but in reality Content management systems and Comparison of content management systems. The latter links to CMSimple, so necessitating an article. The discussion of CMS even is flagged in Wiki Section 6. Expansion is needed and I can do it if you point me to a 'model' article so I can maintain consistency, without being accused of promoting a product.ClemRutter 14:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. No reliable sources at all. NBeale 22:44, 26 February 2007 (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.