Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MEPO software


 * 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. Courcelles 00:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

MEPO software

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Advertisement for a non-notable software product.

This product claims to be widely used in the oil and gas industry. Its claim to importance is that ''The software solution is frequently referenced at conferences in the oil and gas business due to an extensive user base in 50 Exploration and Production companies world wide. Industrial usage is mainly related to assisted history matching, uncertainty quantification and production optimization.'' While no actual references are provided, the article lists six papers or conference presentations. Google Scholar finds two hits that look like incidental mentions or credits, and one News hit in Norwegian which looks like an incidental mention. I suspect the other papers are about the underlying problem the software tries to solve.

This might do something very technical, referenceable, and interesting, but I am not seeing the references out there. Or this may be way too limited and technical to ever achieve notability. The description in the page is too vague to explain what the actual problem is or how the software tries to solve it. Tagged for advertising tone, no inbound links, and COI since 12/09. Contested speedy deletion, not mine. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 19:53, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.


 * Weak Delete: Google search retrieves about 600 hits. I think there's enough to this to pass any notability issues, but I'm concerned about the lack of independent references and the apparent single-purpose status of the article creator.  This could possibly be rescued if there's someone out there who knows more about the software in question and can reference the article appropriately? (Admins - if I'm the only delete vote on this I suggest closing this as no consensus.) Vulcan&#39;s Forge (talk) 03:28, 2 August 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) 00:00, 8 August 2011 (UTC)




 * Delete google search coverage is not uncommon for non-notable freely-downloadable software. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:24, 13 August 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.