Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earthsim


 * 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. Deathphoenix ʕ 17:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Earthsim
Non-notable, overblown screensaver that claims to be edutainment. Danny Lilithborne 08:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SOFTWARE.  Kalani  [talk] 08:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not delete As an Earthsim user I can say that Earthsim is not really a screensaver, it's a virtual globe system that just happens to have a screensaver option. The whole thing is actually pretty unique.  I think the notable bit comes from it's creator, Servan, the Direct 3D guy.  Simon531.
 * Comment The above vote is from the creator of the article. Danny Lilithborne 12:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply Whilst I am a contributor to the article, I am also a regular user of the software, who knows it well, and believe the point of view on which this discussion is being based (stated at the top of this page) is inaccurate and inappropriatly emotive. Simon531.
 * Comment If you're a regular user of the software, anything you write into the article without using reliable third-party sources is original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. ColourBurst 22:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 12:35, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not delete i haven't contribued before but thought i'd better stick up for this one. i think earthsim is pretty big. if you google for virtual globes you'll find it mentioned in all of the first three entries. and on www.virtualglobes.org it appears to be earthsim month this month. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.201.200.223 (talk • contribs) 09:21, 5 October 2006.
 * I tried a Google search on "virtual globe" and did not see Earthsim mentioned in the first three items except at the bottom of the Wikipedia entry for virtual globe (but this could be because I am using the UK version of Google). George J. Bendo 10:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:SOFTWARE --Maelnuneb (Talk) 18:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not delete I believe that the article itself is likely more of a stub than an article, but I do not believe that it warrants deletion. I ask that those who are in favor of deletion visit the actual website, and educate themselves about the premise of this virtual globe.  It is true that it is a commercial application, and as many commercial endeavours one of the goals is of course to turn a profit.  On the other hand today's children are growing up with MTV and console games filling their time, and education has taken a distant back-seat to many other leisure activities.  As a parent, and as an educator, a tool like Earthsim is invaluable to engage children into a learning process that utilizes the same elements that their console games utilize.  There is no doubt that the current Earthsim is presenting a tiny fraction of Earth science that can be covered.  There is also no doubt that this tool could benefit from closer ties with educators for the purpose of content development.  Most importantly there is no doubt that any project whose goal it is to provide you with an entertaining method to teach your kids a thing or two about Earth science, any such project deserves your support.  Please consider that the WP recommendation is revision before deletion. Perhaps this article could be revised in such a way to outline the science education goals of Earthsim to make the WP entry more relevant to WP's mission. 64North 22:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a tertiary source. What this means is that we can't go to the actual website and use that as a source (because the source is primary).  We need verification from third-party reliable sources.  The WP recommendation is indeed revision, but only with material derived from secondary sources, not primary ones.  If secondary sources cannot be found, then deletion is the correct answer.  Wikipedia's mission is not to push a point of view (that Earthsim is better than MTV or console games), unless somebody else writes about it first; otherwise, this violates WP:NPOV.  It is also up to the people who don't want this deleted to provide these sources, as they want the article not to be deleted.  ColourBurst 23:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply I really do understand the tertiary source concept. I also understand the NPOV and didn't mean to imply the article should reflect my personal opinion. However, my personal view was stated in regards to deletion to illustrate a potential benefit of Earthsim that may merit to keep the article around if the article were to be edited and perhaps marked as stub. I also believe that the user who asked for deletion did so in such a way that does not follow accepted Wikiquette and he certainly did not follow nomination guidelines which state that someone should "investigate the possibility of rewriting the article yourself (or at least creating a stub on the topic and requesting expansion) instead of deleting it".  Be that as it may, the issue is Earthsim itself, and not the behavior of the one who started the deletion process. I am certainly giving the requester the benefit of a doubt as his way of expressing himself may not have been intentional but rather caused by his Bipolar Type I condition. For those who are familiar with WP's inner workings.  What would need to be done to convert the article into such a stub that the entry would for the time being be spared from deletion, and deletion can be revisited at a later date should no sufficient progress toward expanding the article be made? 64North 01:07, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * To expand on that, I see some voted Delete per WP:SOFTWARE. However, WP:SOFTWARE states that software entries are notable when "The software is among the core products of a notable software developer or vendor".  Considering that Earthsim is a core product of Servan Keondjian's QubeSoft, and Keondjian himself is notable for he is largely responsible for all things Direct3D, those votes that reference WP:SOFTWARE should really be changed to "Do not delete", no? 64North 01:07, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid not. Even if Keondjian is notable (and I believe he is), he does not automatically confer notablity on whatever it is he does.  Believe it or not, this is how it works for everybody.  It is the sorry truth that very notable individuals usually stand a better chance of being covered by respected sources even if they don't deserve it, so it might seem like anything that Steve Jobs does automatically qualifies as notable, but in reality, he just gets followed around by thousands of respected newspapers and articles hanging on his every word. Unfortunately, Mr. Keondjian must work a little harder for his coverage - but if what he is doing is truely notable, it will come - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 20:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - I found which probably weakly qualifies as a WP:RS. Thats all I could find.  The product seems real enough, the creator has solid credentials, and could possibly be unique in the quickly saturating market of earth and mapping software, but the article reads like a brochure at a trade show, and falls way short of providing any substantial information.  If another WP:RS is found, I would begrudgingly change my vote to Keep pending some heavy editing. - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 00:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - Even if the software is educational, the article is still an advertisement. It is not encyclopedic knowledge. George J. Bendo 10:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.36.87.102 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete - less than 1000 ghits.--Ioannes Pragensis 14:14, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete - I've edited the article to stop it looking like a sales pitch. I don't believe exceeding 1000 ghits is any sort of Wikipedia rule (and I got just short of 10,000) and from a quick google search I found the following references,  and  - DunderBlock.
 * Comment I think you're misunderstanding what a reference is. A trivial mention of what games ATI certifies doesn't say anything about Earthsim (and certain does not say anything _in_ the article).  A reference should support the article's contents.  In addition, blogs are not reliable sources either (that applies to everything from virtualglobes) because anybody can upload them without any quality control whatsoever.  The CPU mag mention seems promising - all we need is some more articles like that.  ColourBurst 21:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete quite simply fails WP:SOFTWARE,  Tewfik Talk 04:19, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, since there are so many WP:SOFTWARE advocates in one place you may also want to direct your attention to TerrainView, TerrainView-Lite, and TerrainView-Globe. Happy deleting! 64North 03:43, 11 October 2006 (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.