Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TlosLite


 * 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. With no objection to userfication, or possible recreation if and only if independent reliable sources that give significant coverage to the software itself can be found, which seems possible, though not likely, because of the dificulties in finding sources in other languages Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

TlosLite

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This page was recently speedily deleted for being advertising. Its recreation doesn't overtly pimp the product but I believe this software fails WP:GNG and the criteria of WP:NSOFT. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 11:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 11:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

could you please clearify your toughts about our products page deletion ? Serkan tas (talk) 12:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Another lightweight IT Job Scheduling software.  No reference in article, and Google News draws a complete blank. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:19, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * What you mean by no reference ? Serkan tas (talk) 05:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Smerdis of Tlön's rationale. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ???? Serkan tas (talk) 05:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The article lacs references to the reliable sources in contrast to the WP:Citing sources guideline. The cause of the lack of sources (suitable for establishing topic's notability) is identified as the lack of such sources in the wild, as no one among the editors researching the topic's coverage could find anything suitable. You might want to read the pages we are wikilinking to in order to understand the arguments. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: I found downloads websites and unreliable websites. SL93 (talk) 20:13, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. You should check product's official web site www.tlos.com.tr for download but you have to register. What you mean by unreliable ? Serkan tas (talk) 05:50, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Clarification - For Wikipedia's working definition of "unreliable", see our page Identifying reliable sources (click on the blue link and it will take you to the page). When I stated the software as "failing WP:GNG", I was referring to our General Notability Guidelines: a topic should receive significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject if it is to have an article on Wikipedia. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 09:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Reliable - So do you think tlos.com.tr or tlosscheduler.com is reliable ? Serkan tas (talk) 05:50, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Tlos and its creator Likya Teknoloji has been mentioned on this article at BT Haber, which is a popular weekly ICT magazine in Turkey. http://www.bthaber.com.tr/?p=12211 — Oztase (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 12:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC) (UTC).
 * I'm no sure this reference is usable at all for this article. As I get from automatic translation, it discusses the firm, not the software, with TlosLite appearing only in passing mention. &mdash; Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:41, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The software Tlos Lite is not a well known widely and worldwide famous product. We are trying to make it so. We have local customers well-known worldwide. If you require i may send you the names of the companies. But we need some time to make the software discussed by valuable amount of professionals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serkan tas (talk • contribs) 07:51, 17 February 2012 (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.