Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taiga.io


 * 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. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:13, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Taiga.io

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Everything in the article can be verified (although it's unsourced) but none of it is enough to pass WP:GNG. It's just another software project that has not received coverage in reliable independent media. § FreeRangeFrog croak 15:46, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Taiga.io has received substantial coverage around the world. Examples include:

RedHat's OpenSource.com, The US 2144 most trafficked site in the US and a top site covering the Open Source movement. The article introducing Taiga.io has become a top 5 reader favorite:

Japan's 90th most trafficked website profiled the tool extensively

T3N.de, Germany's 275 most trafficked website highlighted the tool.

Webrazzi.com, Turkey's 161 most trafficked website profiled the tool

In order to avoid any editorial issues and to avoid any appearance of self-promotion, the author of the page used the same language (adapted) used to introduce the tool Github.com on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.122.96.109 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  21:27, 21 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti*Let's talk!* 04:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Weak Delete - The refs above appear decent, perhaps falling just short of WP:CORPDEPTH in my view, though their use of the same images with much of the same information makes me suspicious that they may be working off PR materials. It may also be that it's just WP:TOOSOON -- it's still in beta and some of the article's language is even in future tense. There's also the issue of the article containing WP:UNDUE information, some of it presented as though for an advertisement, company website, etc. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 13:56, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete – generally the same opinion as Rhododendrites, although I don't think the article was all that promotional. The Japanese review was a good run-through of how it works (looks pretty easy to use). But it's Beta software and coverage is still pretty thin. If version 1.0 is successful that should change, so I say wait a while longer. – Margin1522 (talk) 20:57, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 09:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per above - Non notable software, Fails GNG. – Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11:53, 6 January 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.