Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strehler (CMS)


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 10:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Strehler (CMS)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable piece of open source software. Sources are affiliated and I couldn't find any significant sources that are not. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 13:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * delete non notable, no outside coverage Deunanknute (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

In order to keep the objectiveness of the List_of_content_management_systems, as well as of Wikipedia itself, I needed to create the Strehler_(CMS) stub article. The references I linked are from the project's official Web sites and projects development pages. If such sources are not recognized by Wikipedia as reliable and my article will be deleted because of that, please explain why in Wikipedia, and in List_of_content_management_systems exists many articles which sources are also only from the project's site and the development repositories? Here is a short list of such articles: ...
 * AdaptCMS
 * Directus
 * Ametys_CMS
 * Yanel
 * OpenKM
 * Cyclone3
 * DynPG
 * Habari
 * Jamroom
 * Orchard_Project
 * SPIP

I will be thankful, if you explain what else need to be done in order to be create an Strehler_(CMS) article for it to be included in the List_of_content_management_systems as the above mentioned articles are.

''I have no affiliation with Strehler_(CMS). Moreover - I have also written another two stub articles (Galileo CMS and ShinyCMS) concerning other content_management_systems written in Perl. '' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iva.e.popova (talk • contribs) 18:17, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


 * You would need multiple, reliable, non-affiliated sources that establish the software as significant in some way, as detailed in the WP:GNG and WP:NSOFT guidelines. Regarding all those other CMSs, that's just Wikipedia's backlog. Thanks for the list, I'll go through them to see which ones need discussion. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 20:26, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability, with a lack of reliable sources of information.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 18:37, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - CMS software article of unclear notability, lacking independent coverage in reliable sources. A search did not turn up any significant RS coverage of this software.Dialectric (talk) 01:26, 4 February 2015 (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.