Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ostests


 * 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 01:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Ostests

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Article about an open source assessment project whose only claim to notability is to exist. I could find no substantive third-party coverage of this, or awards or significant mentions in the tech press. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSOFTWARE. § FreeRangeFrog croak 06:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete I found a number of primary web sites related to the project. ostests appears to be incorporated into the testif assessment software suite, but there was no in depth discussion of ostests on the testif site. There were no secondary references, beyond noting the software, on other websites, in news articles, in books, or in scholarly publications. Without independent reliable secondary sources, this project does not yet meet notability guidelines. Mark viking (talk) 14:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 03:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 02:34, 12 January 2013 (UTC)




 * Delete. I couldn't find any suitable sources to demonstrate notability. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  11:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. Additionally, created by an SPA as possibly promotional. Dialectric (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. I have reviewed the references added by 109.69.14.154 which are intended to demonstrate notability - the first one I couldn't readily find any ref to ostests, the other three are all self-published by a user with a very similar userid to the one used on Wikipedia. IMHO this article borders on meeting criteria for WP:CSD G11, or at the very least WP:COI.—Baldy Bill (talk) 20:46, 14 January 2013 (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.