Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Se-lib


 * 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 soft delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:34, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Se-lib

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Open source library without secondary coverage. BrigadierG (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. BrigadierG (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Can you please explain further? What do you mean by secondary coverage?  Can you give an example? Mudcap (talk) 21:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Essentially, all 5 criterion set out at WP:GNG - significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. For software in particular, there's discussion of the most likely forms that would take at WP:NSOFTWARE. BrigadierG (talk) 21:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:SECONDARY explains secondary sources. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Have added references from additional sources independent of the subject. Included explanations that the library was funded for development, is used regularly in the classroom in multiple classes, on research projects, and is the subject professional training venues.  I could add more instances. These should all qualify. Thank you for the improvement suggestions. Mudcap (talk) 02:09, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, none of the sources in the article seem to be independent. For example, this tutorial was taught by a lead developer of the library. Coverage from the organization funding the project is not independent either. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 06:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes it was taught be a developer, but the tutorial was sponsored by the independent International Council of Systems Engineers, San Diego Chapter. They decided to run the tutorial for the sake of its members, spend resources for it, and it is the listed on their website. Doesn't that qualify as independent?  Thanks. Mudcap (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately not - WP:IIS BrigadierG (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: Any of the sources used aren't reliable or are passing mentions; I don't find anything extra about this software package, other than where to download it. Oaktree b (talk) 22:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 03:52, 13 May 2024 (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.