Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EICASLAB


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn, AfD ran its full 5-day course without any deletion vote.--PeaceNT (talk) 03:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

EICASLAB

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has been speedy deleted twice on January 10 under WP:CSD and WP:CSD, as evidenced by the messages left on creating editor's talk page. The newly re-created article states in the edit summary The text has been deeply revised including article citations and references from reliable sources. The vast majority of these reliable sources in the article link to the company's website, ie the sources are self published. This article is still blatant advertising except that the creating editor took some time to make the article look a little more encyclopedic to possibly avoid a third deletion. SWik78 (talk) 18:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * In addition, the creator of this article is Gabriella Caporaletti, the president of the company selling this product . SWik78 (talk) 19:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Withdrawal of nomination - The creating editor has made the effort to fix the issues in question (ie, the official website, external references) and has demonstrated the importance of the subject. I withdraw my nomination. SWik78 (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Caporaletti (talk) 20:42, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Dear SWik78(talk), thank you for your comments about the article EICASLAB. I understand your indications. Before to make new modifications, I would like to explain my point of view and I would like to ask you a further feedback that can help me to go in the right direction. I confirm you that I work at EICAS Automazione (I am the Director, not the President) and that I was the coordinator of the ACODUASIS Project, the European Project mentioned in the article from which EICASLAB was derived. The project was judged by the Commission as a "success story" and for this results the results of Projects were included in the Commission ICT website. Of course I do not have any intention to put in wikipedia an article as blatant advertising of a product. The fact is that EICASLAB is a laboratory that is used by European companies and industries (I have put references on that in the wikipedia article) and I think interesting and usefull for the scientific community to summarize in wikipedia the main information about EICASLAB. Concerning the references, it is possible to check in the article EICASLAB that the on line links at the EICASLAB web-site are mainly related to the ACODUASIS workshop: One step Further in Automatic Control Design. This workshop has been promoted by Camera Commercio of Torino, Torino Wireless, IRC Innovation Network (European Commission), APLS Innovation Relay Center, Politecnico of Torino and Unioncamere Piemonte. You can have evidence about that at Camera Commercio of Torino website workshop programme at Camera Commercio di Torino website and Torino Wireless websiteworkshop programme at Torino Wireless website, in which the workshop programme is included. Now, I thought more interesting for a reader to have available the full text of the article (which is available at EICASLAB web-site) instead that only the title available in the programme. In addition, by looking at the wikipedia article "MATLAB" (which is a product of the same type of EICASLAB), I have seen that a lot references are related to the company that sells such a product. So, I am a bit confused .... More in general, I would like to point out that all other links mentioned in the article EICASLAB are related to International Conferences and website of the European Commission. Many papers are written by university professors and industrial researchers of companies that used EICASLAB and included in the papers their own achieved results. What do you think about that? Thank you very much for your help. Gabriella

Caporaletti (talk) 17:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Dear SWik78(talk), thank you again for your comments about the article EICASLAB. As first reaction to your suggestions, I have removed from the article the links to the official website included in the reference list section. Furthermore, I have also removed the uncorrect behaviour of the EICASLAB website that you have indicated (thank you for that!). Now you can check that if you click that link to read more about EICASLAB you are able to leave the site by clicking the BACK button. Concerning the content of the article, of course I can review again it. For instance I can include in the text some indications about the mathematical methodology adopted (in any case all the indications are available in the links to scientific papers that I have included). My problem now is to understand if it makes some sense that I review the text if it is not acceptable at all the fact that I am the director of EICAS Automazione. In my first intention, please be sure that I inserted the article not just for introducing an advertising of a product: EICAS is a small company, the software EICASLAB is very specific for the automatic control design field and the fact of being or not visible in wikipedia cannot modify the chances of the company to sell it. The fact for which I introduced the article in wikipedia was because the laboratory is now used by industries and research institutes and other similar laboratories, like MATLAB, Mathematica, Scilab are mentioned in Wikipedia and people often ask why EICASLAB is not mentioned. So I just wanted to open an article on this matter, thinking that other people external to my company could co-operate to increase the quality of the text. On the contrary, if it is not acceptable that I introduce this matter in wikipedia, of course I will accept the rules. Thank you again for receiving your feedback, Best regards, Gabriella


 * 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.