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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JPlaton[edit]

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

A software development system with scant evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:13, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -A software development (platform) system is notable because exist. Is like a piece of life into the wool ecosystem. Maybe this piece is not so important for the life in the planet but is notable if you want to construct a knowledge data base of what exist.

In my opinion Wikipedia is not a “Guinness catalogue” or a “list of famous things “ is a knowledge database also with things that exist in the real life.(f.ex. UniPaaS )

For jPlaton exist at least one academic paper (and ongoing 2), 2-3 software houses working with this platform and working products produced with this system.-- • Corfiot (talk) 09:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. You'll want to have a look at our notability policy for additional information, but - in short - something that exists is not necessarily notable. What we need is information about the software from independent sources - and I can find none. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:24, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that "Gratuate Thesis ( in Greek Language), Author: Antigoni Tsuri, Supervisor: Prof. Ioannis G. Stamelos, ARISTOTLE UNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKI, Sep 2007" is a independent source.

Sorry if i am in wrong way and maybe i don’t understand the matter. But, for example, in the UniPaaS article I don’t see independent sources. There are 3 sources but all of them are articles published by the software house of the product. Corfiot (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:15, 19 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not a notable piece of software; all Google News hits are typos. Referenced to a graduate thesis and to internal sites. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no proper evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:05, 21 October 2010 (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.