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. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GaiaEHR[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable software, no reliable, independent, verifiable sources. No GNews, GBook hits. GHits limited to company self-published sources and non-reliable sources. Promotional. CSD tags repeatedly removed. GregJackP Boomer! 04:27, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Query - Non-notable software and "no reliable"? GaiaEHR is just getting started but, we have provided downloads, git repositories to allow other developers to contribute.

As for the, "No GNews" and "GBook hits", not sure what is this.Vela1606 (talk) 04:57, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable means that there are no secondary sources, such as books, magazines, or news coverage of the software. Reliable comes from the type of source. Social media such as facebook, myspace, blogs, youtube, etc., are considered to be not reliable. Reliable comes from an established source with a strong editorial control policy, such as the NY Times, PC World, etc. GNews is Google news and GBooks is Google books, meaning a search turned up no sources that could be used to show notability.

If GaiaEHR is just getting started, I doubt that it will be notable enough to merit a Wikipedia (encyclopedia) article on it. Wikipedia is not designed to promote or provide information about new products. The download links will be removed as they are against Wikipedia policy (see WP:ELNO). Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 05:24, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I miss spoke, the first beta version just came out, but the project have been under development for more than 2 years. Our intention is not to promote, but to inform.

Gnews - I understand, GaiaEHR doesn't have any source like that for now. As for the download, I apologized for that. Vela1606 (talk) 05:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it "doesn't have any source like that", then it likely won't meet Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines WP:GNG. Articles on Wikipedia need to be notable (WP:N) and notability must be verified (WP:V) by reliable sources (WP:RS). It doesn't matter how long the product has been around because notability is not temporary - it either is or it isn't. However, it might be that an article for the product has been created too soon (WP:TOOSOON) - if that is the case you can userfy the article (have it put into your own space where it is not visible to the public) and you can continue to develop it by adding reliable sources to verify your claims (if / when they exist).

You should also have a read of Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest Guideline (WP:COI) if you have a connection to the product or company selling it. COI editing is strongly discouraged. Stalwart111 (talk) 05:55, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - for all the reasons outlined above. Stalwart111 (talk) 05:55, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence of attained notability. AllyD (talk) 07:01, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 15:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I understand. just to clarify, this software is not for sale (is an open source project).Vela1606 (talk) 16:15, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.