Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cybermed


 * 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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Cybermed

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability. The article appears to be largely promotional and original research. I am One of Many (talk) 09:22, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 22:51, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Quick Google search shows ambiguous title and so few good hits over the first 50 returned links. The references in the article do not help in establishing notability with those provided either being general references that don't discuss the subject or self-published material. Fails WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Ambiguous title? Cybermed's homepage www.ondemand3d.com is the first thing that pops up on Google. Its the best-known brand of dental software in Asia. The reason for the few references is that Wikipedia has a lack of articles on digital dentistry.  Things like 'surgical template', 'guided implant surgery', or 'surgery planning' and '3D image processing software' should already have pages.  This is my first article on Wikipedia and I was planning to write one on 'guided implant surgery' after this.  I can work to make changes if you tell me what's wrong.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garmaa (talk • contribs) 10:58, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * * Keep Okay, I just checked out the first two references and I find they suddenly redirect somewhere else. I swear that when I was writing the article, the links were copy pasted exactly as they were and referenced in the article. I think the company might have been alerted that their old webpage was still up and running. I think that might be my fault as I was driving a lot of traffic there.  But I do think that the article has enough 'respectable' or published references to account for it. I have a question. Is it okay to use Korean references? You will be able to make sure with Google Translate or even ask a Korean contributor.  User:Garmaa (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 12:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)  – You can only "vote" once. I am One of Many (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * What about these sources and stories? Candleabracadabra (talk) 01:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, didn't know that counted as a vote. I think I fixed the some of the problems with the references section. When doing a Google search, please search for Cybermed Inc. (not Cybermed) or by software names such as OnDemand3D and In2Guide. A search on Google Scholar comes up with 20, 30 pages of results. Please tell me if there are any more problems. Garmaa (talk) 11:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:30, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep This is truly truly excellent software, astounding really. I think because it's so well known in the dental world in Asia, makes it notable. There is a number of Google book entries, and large number of entries in various country specific Google sites. Seems to pass WP:ORG and WP:GNG. scope_creep talk 18:02, 31 August 2013 (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.