Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Menksoft


 * 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. ÷seresin 02:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Menksoft

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Promotional article about a non-notable company and their software product created and maintained by a single user BabelStone (talk) 21:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because the first largely duplicates the Menksoft page, and the second is just a redirect to the Menksoft page:


 * Keep - If you don't have Windows Vista (and partly even then), the products of this company are the only decent way to write the Mongolian language in its traditional script on a computer. That should make them unique enough to be notable, even if they don't meet the usual size-based criteria. Of course, there's no need to have several articles, and I've already tried to convince the creator about merging them. He has no Wikipedia experience and will need help finding the right tone of writing for an encyclopedia, but I don't think his goal is to write an ad (the current content is much too technical for that anyway). --Latebird (talk) 22:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The usual notability criterion has nothing at all to do with size. Neither do the WP:CORP criteria.  And your rationale provides no explanation as to how those criteria are actually satisfied.  "It's the only way to do something." is not in any of our policies and guidelines for good reason.  This is an encyclopaedia with goals of being verifiable, neutral, and free from original research; and to have articles here subjects must be documented, in depth, by multiple independent sources by identifiable people with good reputations for fact checking and accuracy.  Please address that.  You haven't done so at all.  Uncle G (talk) 16:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mongolia-related deletion discussions.  —Latebird (talk) 00:29, 16 June 2009(UTC)
 * In practise, size of a company is often a deciding factor (including, but not only by increasing the chance of third party coverage), but that's not really the topic here. In our case, most sources will be in Chinese or Mongolian language, which I'll have trouble digging up myself lacking the necessary skills (I can only decipher very simple Mongolian text in cyrillic). I see that the creator, who seems fluent in both languages and all relevant scripts, has not been notified of this nomination. I'll point him to the necessary steps. --Latebird (talk) 20:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:NOT needs a third-party citation and I've already gave: the MSD China one and a German one, both're occidental. If you need Chinese citation, there're even more: here's a government one.


 * And I'm not an advertisor of Menksoft, but Menksoft is the most popular one. And before KB929763 everyone said Unicode is unstable. I've tried most popular Mongolian IMEs in China and Microsoft Unicode IME, so I know that.


 * I will probably write another company - Saiyin if the article Menksoft is complete, so that it would be more neutral - two giants has been wrote and other IMEs are often compatible with the Menksoft code and Saiyin code. Currently, I didn't see Unicode Mongolian pages in China.


 * As for the merging actions, talk here.


 * Is "secondary sources" enough? --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 04:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Since it's not a deeply scientific (eg. historical) topic, secondary sources should be fine. The most likely candidates seem to be computer magazines and language related publications. Coverage in mainstream media would be even better, because they show that a topic is relevant for "normal people" and not just for specialists. The coverage should also be "non-trivial". In the sources, the company/products should be at the center of attention, and not only mentioned in passing. --Latebird (talk) 21:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * One of the reasons I do not think the article is appropriate is that it contains unsourced and unverifiable claims, such as "In 2003, it was evaluate as "重点软件企业" of Inner Mongolia and 20 giant private enterprise in Hohhot. Now, it's supported by the government". "In 2003, it was evaluate as "重点软件企业" of Inner Mongolia and 20 giant private enterprise in Hohhot" should be changed to something like "In 2003 Menksoft was evaluated as a 'major software enterprise' in Inner Mongolia, and one of twenty large private enterprises in Hohhot" (if I understand it correctly) and a reference added. The unsupported statement "Now, it's supported by the government" should be removed entirely, unless a referenced explanation of how the Chinese governement supports Menksoft is provided. BabelStone (talk) 08:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * To BabelStone: ✅ (edits gov supports). It's really a good thing that you can read Chinese, so that origins can be verfied. In fact, at first, I didn't want to write the history of the Crop. but later I was noticed and I realized the article contains only products so I thought it was time to make it similar to other Wikipedia articles such as Adobe Systems. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 11:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * To Latebird: "the company/products should be at the center of attention" - both the 2 reference (except for the German one: in the German one, it's not trivial, but still not in the "center of attention") I mentioned in "keep" satisfy this. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 11:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

To BabelStone: Still a problem: how to translate "扶植"? I translated it as "support" but I don't know whether that's proper. --虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 11:17, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. There seem to be a handful of sources, not sure if this one was spotted yet:. The article needs heavy cleanup, but the company seems just notable enough. Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:52, 20 June 2009 (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.