Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EHCP (2nd nomination)


 * 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 policy based arguments for deletion are clear enough. That " project that could revolutionize the Internet" will be cause for an article after that happens, when there are reliable sources saying so.  DGG ( talk ) 02:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

EHCP
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unreferenced article for non-notable software product. The article was created by a single purpose account, and this was done in collaboration with the software developers (see this). There are no credible assertions of notability in the article. Biker Biker (talk) 09:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:20, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. This probably qualifies for speedy deletion as re-creation of previously deleted content.  Prior article was deleted, and deletion upheld at review.  This version contains text substantially identical to the previous one.  It is expanded with a feature list, but does not address the underlying issue of lack of sources and lack of encyclopedic significance. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. ehcpuser: Actually I did not write that article, but, I can say about that: You say, "non-notable software product"; ehcp has been downloaded more than 65000 times, installed in thousands of webservers (http://www.serversnstuff.com/product-review/ehcp/). Is this a non-notable product ?. I really got tired of writing something on wikipedia, about ehcp. Probably this will be the last bytes that I write to wikipedia. You say, "lack of encyclopedic significance". You said it before too. There are hundreds of articles in wikipedia, which is only a product in market, just like Plesk. If Plesk is a product, ehcp is also a product. if echp has no encyclopedic significance, also does Plesk. I think ehcp article (and links, such as in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_hosting_control_panels), are tried to be deleted by persons who does not want ehcp to rise. You say "re-creation of previously deleted content". This is absolutely not true. Previously, I had added some content about ehcp. Now, somebody else - which in fact I dont even know personally - has added the content to wikipedia. For notability, again: http://www.google.com/search?q=ehcp  239.000 results enaugh for notability? (some are not related to this ehcp, actually) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehcpuser (talk • contribs) 15:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)  — Ehcpuser (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment - the presence of the Plesk article holds very little value in this discussion, as Plesk may also be a good candidate for deletion. See Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions and Other stuff exists. The 239,000+ Google results may not have much value either (see Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions). Chris (talk) 22:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

 Chris (talk) 20:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC) --Earnolmartin (talk) 05:43, 26 November 2011 (UTC) — Earnolmartin (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete Article has a "Features list" ending "...and many more" WP:NOTADVERTISING. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tigerboy1966 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete IF there is any in-depth coverage by reliable sources (other than how-tos and forums), it isn't in the article and I'm not seeing it among the Ghits either. --Tikiwont (talk) 11:29, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete for a few different reasons:
 * 1) This article is quite similar to the original EHCP article, which was deleted with deletion upheld at review.
 * 2) It is overly promotional in its tone, which is normally an addressable issue. However, in this case there are practically no third-party sources to go on to get an honest evaluation of the product, bringing me to my next point.
 * 3) The product is not notable due to its lack of coverage in secondary and tertiary sources. According to WP:PRIMARY, secondary sources should be used to establish notability. There appear to be none, so the product can be deemed not worthy of mention in Wikipedia.
 * 4) No reliable sources not directly affiliated with EHCP have been found. According to WP:RS, blogs and forums not reliable.
 * Delete - There was no coverage in reliable sources the previous time, and that siutation remains the same this time. -- Whpq (talk) 20:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. webehostin.com: We Be HostiN.com uses this web panel software.  This is an open source project that could revolutionize the Internet.  EHCP's wikipedia entry contains nothing but truthful information.  All of those features exist in his software, and you may download and test it yourself.  www.echp.net.  Please do not delete articles which contain truthful information.  Please become informed before passing judgment.  I find your lack of testing disturbing.  Great software, and the article should stay.  Also, you can verify that we use EHCP by using the following link:  http://ns3.webehostin.com (see the EHCP logo)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earnolmartin (talk • contribs) 05:39, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment -

--Chris (talk) 22:23, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment -


 * Comment - Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources. Whpq (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2011 (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.