Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Padrino (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. Jayjg (talk) 17:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Padrino (software)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unremarkable software, Google search returns only false positive and not the software. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:21, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Also adding. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:45, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  —Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notability hasn't been demonstrated. Its a new article so the author could userfy it and add relevant cites. If they exist (probably they don't). Szzuk (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I am the author of this article. I would argue that a simple search for 'Padrino Framework' shows many results on Google for our framework. We have an article published about the framework on RubyInside, a notable ruby news site (http://www.rubyinside.com/padrino-sinatra-webapp-framework-3198.html/comment-page-1#comment-41456). What do I have to do to prevent this from being deleted? I am referring to the 'Padrino_Framework' page specifically. The other page at (software) I agree can be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nesquena (talk • contribs) 01:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I have searched for "Padrino Framework" on Google, and while there are ghits, they are mostly only sites that simply mention them and the article has a page in them with information that likely isn't from a NPOV. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Padrino is a legitimate web framework but was only just announced. We have 300 followers on Github (http://github.com/padrino/padrino-framework) and if you search twitter for "Padrino Framework" there has been a fair amount of buzz. I am not sure the rules for having a page but I would argue we have enough results on Google and Twitter that it isn't outrageous for us to have a page. Please explain to me if I have simply misunderstood the rules or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.43.132.58 (talk) 04:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Even if the article's subject does have gHits, there is not enough independent coverage out there for this program. The only independent coverage seems to be mere pages on article websites. Even if those are reliable and can be on external links, those do not qualify as sources. And even if there is independent coverage, I doubt if this framework is notable enough for a page on Wikipedia. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete and userfy. Nesquena and 24.43.132.58, see the article on notability for rules on notability--twittering and web buzz aren't sufficient, what you need are  reviews from reliable and verifiable sources. Think of these terms as class definitions. Also, please be aware that you apparently have a  conflict of interest. If you have questions about all of this, please feel free to contact me on my talk page.  --Nuujinn (talk) 21:25, 8 April 2010 (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.