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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:07, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MEDINA[edit]

MEDINA (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This is an advertisement, obviously, but it's not, I think, for a notable product. The references are internal, or are not actually to the product itself (such as referencing various trademark holders). Guy (Help!) 14:58, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (by page creator): In my opinion, MEDINA is a notable product for sure. Since about 20 years MEDINA is one of the leading pre-/postprocessors for FE-analysis -used in manufacturing industries.

Especially, in automotive industries MEDINA is or has been widely used by various OEMs (e.g. Daimler, Volkswagen, BMW, MAN, Ford,...) and its suppliers and engineering partners.

The references 1,2,14 in the article are about the software product MEDINA itself.

Reference 1 is the official product description for MEDINA.

Reference 2 was published in the journal about simulations "FEM-, CFD-, und MKS Simulation".

Reference 14 was published by SAE International - a notable organization for mobility engineering

Reference 15 is a reference showing that MEDINA can be used to solve typical problems in simulation tasks.

Please, also notice that in Wikipedia a lot of similar articles can be found about other products for FE-simulation, e.g. NASTRAN, MSC Software, ANSYS, ADINA, Hypermesh, ANSA.

I hope this contributions will help to close the issue.

Best regards

--Hobramski (talk) 09:07, 27 April 2011 (UTC) — Hobramski (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Provisional: Just want to note that article does have refs to three serious articles (refs 2, 14, & 15) which could be reliable sources, but two of them are at a pay site and the third is both in German and unlinked. Hopefully, someone who has the access and skills to do so can check them before a decision is made here. It may be possible that they're only about related subject matter and do not deal in a substantial way with MEDINA, but it's also possible that the opposite is true and we must AGF until we know one way or the other. The rest of the refs are either to self-published material (which can be used as sources for certain facts, but which cannot establish notability; see SELFPUB #5), inconsequential, or unreliable. If it turns out by the end of this discussion that two or all three of those refs do not mention MEDINA in a substantial way, this comment can be !counted as a delete; if by the end of this discussion that issue is unresolved or two or more of those three refs do prove to substantially discuss MEDINA this comment is a keep. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 14:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (by page creator):

I would like to add some more references which help to prove that MEDINA is a notable product:

MEDINA is mentioned in a lot of books dealing with FE topics, e.g.:

FEM für Praktiker, Dr. Günther Müller / Clemens Groth, ISBN 978-3-8169-2685-6, page 52| url=http://books.google.de/books?hl=de&lr=&id=5IFBp7rJMioC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=MEDINA+fem&ots=RAJ6vauuVu&sig=Uvr2G8i611xOD1V34w9GdgBfVj0#v=onepage&q=MEDINA%20fem&f=false

FEM-Formelsammlung Statik und Dynamik, Prof. Dr. Lutz Nasdala, ISBN 978-3-8348-0980-3, page 8| url=http://books.google.de/books?id=UkNvAD0MdVcC&pg=PA8&dq=fem+medina+-autor-Medina+Nasdala&hl=de#v=onepage&q&f=false

FEM mit Nastran, Rüdiger Heim, ISBN 3-446-22958-2, page 107| url=http://books.google.de/books?id=CXsPVRz9NT0C&pg=PA107&dq=MEDINA+fem&hl=de#v=onepage&q&f=false

CAE-Methoden in der Fahrzeugtechnik, Prof. Martin Meywerk, ISBN 978-3-540-49866-7| url=http://books.google.de/books?id=qYB8KJb-BDAC&pg=PP6&dq=MEDINA+cae&hl=de#v=onepage&q=MEDINA%20cae&f=false

Furthermore there are technical papers about CAE-topics which mention MEDINA, e.g.:

A. Makinouchi, C. Teodosiu and T. Nakagawa. “Advance in FEM Simulation and its Related Technologies in Sheet Metal Forming”

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B8CXH-4P5CHXD-8&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F31%2F1998&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1733931189&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=e0bde0ba1ccf4e51fab205639687742c&searchtype=a

O. Flores Santiago, R. Bausinger. “Automatische Schweißpunkt-Optimierung an Karosserien“, http://fe04.fe-design.de/fileadmin/akweb/docs_meetings_public/FE-K-98-Flores.pdf

Ignacio Esteban. „Die Rolle der Finite-Elemente-Berechnung in der Produktentwicklung“, https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-3-642-13101-1_8

R. Meske and M. Friedrich. “Optimization of simple linear and advanced nonlinear problems using TOSCA and ABAQUS”. http://fe04.fe-design.de/fileadmin/publikationen/publikationen2003/2003-06_Optimization_using_ABAQUS_and_TOSCA.pdf

Dr.-Ing. Ralf Meske, Fritz Mulfinger. ” Topology and Shape Optimization of Components and Systems with Contact Boundary Conditions”., http://fe04.fe-design.de/fileadmin/publikationen/publikationen2002/2002-04-24_Nafems_Wiesbaden_FED_paper.pdf

VDI-Z, Band 140, p.34, http://books.google.de/books?id=3K4qAQAAIAAJ&q=MEDINA+fem&dq=MEDINA+fem&hl=de

B. Mlekusch, C. Dornberg, F.Streicher. „CAE-Prozessintegration und Optimierung“. http://www.dynamore.de/documents/papers/conference-08/A-I-05.pdf

C.E. Brenner, B. Unger, C. Gaier, et al. ”Fatigue Assessment of welding seams and spot joints based on FEA” http://www.femfat.com/ftp/papers/2000/08_2000sae.pdf

There are several master thesis dealing with MEDINA:

Jürgen Butscher: Considering Replacement of MEDINA Geometric Kernel by a NURBS-based Kernel / Untersuchungen zur Ablösung des MEDINA-Geometrie-Kerns durch einen NURBS-basierten Kern. 20070131. Current MEDINA geometric kernel is based on polynomials and lacks powerful algorithms for surface intersections and offsets. Commercial, NURBS-based geometric kernels offer more advanced algorithms. They are investigated in this diploma thesis.

Joachim Blasy & Marijan Rumenovic: Surface Reconstruction from Results of Topological Optimizations Using Active B-Splines / CAD-Flächengenerierung aus Ergebnissen einer Topologieoptimierung mittels aktiver B-Splines. 20060226. This diploma thesis aims to a similar target like its two predecessors. However, the task of finding a suitable parametrization of the constructed surfaces is treated with algorithms like those described in H. Pottmann, S. Leopoldseder: A concept for parametric surface fitting which avoids the parametrization problem. Computer Aided Geometric Design 20 (2003), 343-362. http://www.geometrie.tuwien.ac.at/pottmann

Sefa Ülger: Surface Reconstruction from Finite Element Meshes and from Results of Topological Optimizations / Flächenrekonstruktion aus Finite-Elemente-Netzen und aus Ergebnissen von Topologieoptimierern. 20041130. This diploma thesis continues the one of Philipp Wagner. Several new and enhanced algorithms take the concept close to practical usability.

Philipp Wagner: Surface Reconstruction from Finite Element Meshes / Flächenrekonstruktion aus Finite-Elemente-Netzen. 20030414. Several applications in finite element preprocessing require the reconstruction of CAD / CAGD data from finite element meshes. This thesis figures out which currently known surface recovering algorithms fit best to finite element surface meshes used in automotive industries and which obstacles are to get over.

Regina Schikora: PH curves / PH-Kurven. 20020301 Pythagorean Hodograph curves have proved to be an interesting tool in two dimensional design and CNC manufacturing (cf. papers of Ravi T. Farouki et al.). This thesis shows that transfering results from 2D to 3D curves leads to several severe problems, for instance: quite expensive numerical computations, the need to use higher order polynomials or non-planar PH curves interpolating planar data.

Helena Pfannenstiehl: „Vergleich mehrerer Festigkeitshypothesen auf deren FEM-Berechnungen…“ http://books.google.de/books?id=LBOib1x5xIEC&pg=PA55&dq=MEDINA+fem&hl=de#v=onepage&q=MEDINA%20fem&f=false

There is market analysis carried out by Technical University Munich in 2006 showing that 43% of the engineers in CAE-departments use MEDINA as pre-processor.: http://www.pe.mw.tum.de/forschung/publikationen/Cidad-WPS_2006-01.pdf

Finally, about the product MEDINA is a yearly conference (Medina User Meeting) with more than 100 participants: http://www.dynamore.de/konferenzen/bevorstehende/dynamore-auf-veranstaltungen/t-systems-medina

https://servicenet.t-systems.com/tsi/en/641326/Home/T-Systems-PLM-en/News-and-Events/Latest_News_and_Events/090519-MEDINA-UF

I hope this contribution will help to close the issue.

--Hobramski (talk) 08:47, 2 May 2011 (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) 00:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Hobramski, thanks for presenting all the material about the subject. I haven't reviewed the sources since I'm at work but I will do so tonight. Just wanted to point out now that you should only place the keep !vote once. Any additional information or opinions you have you may simply include without any !vote, or you may mark it for clarity with "Comment" or some other descriptive bold text - frankieMR (talk) 15:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Couldn't review much of the sources because of the language, while others were down. For what I was able to gather from the texts the subject is treated informally, I mean, assuming a certain familiarity with the name at least. How much of that familiarity belongs to specialized users or to a broader audience is unclear without some expertise in the area. About the article itself it requires a lot of cleanup of spam and self published sources, but that issue wouldn't weigh for deletion if it is properly addressed - frankieMR (talk) 07:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - what is the core of the matter of the discussion? Are we discussing about the question if MEDINA is a notable product or not? Or Are we discussing about the style of the article? Or are we discussing about both? With regard to the question if MEDINA is a notable or not I listed above a lot of sources proving the natability of MEDINA. For sure, most of the sources are written in German since MEDINA is a German product. Nevertheless, I think also with no knowledge of the German language it is possible to review most sources. With regard to the style I have difficulties to follow the line of argument. In Wikipedia there are a lot of articles about commercial software product (e.g. Microsoft Windows as an example for an operating system, Dassault CATIA as an example for a CAD tool, NASTRAN, ADINA, PATRAN as examples for CAE tools. I took such articles as template for writing the article about MEDINA. And I do not see any differenes concerning the structuring, the style and the attached references. To be more concrete, one example: I added an internal reference (see reference 1) since - for sure- MEDINA is a commercial product and consequently the most detailed product description can be found on the website of T-Systems. However, this kind of quotation is not unusual, on the contrary it can be found in almost every article about commercial products (MS Windows, CATIA, NASTRAN, ADINA, PATRAN). Anyway, I am open for every proposal (and I will appreciate it) to improve the article.

Regards

--Hobramski (talk) 16:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The core matter is notability. Issues of style such as advertisement or biased content are definitely a concern if present, but they are addressed through cleanup and they are usually not a reason for deletion. I didn't find the sources to establish notability so evidently that I didn't need to actually understand the language, and while I assume that your analysis of them as solid sources was done in form and order, we do require a deeper analysis by other editors to confirm it so that a proper consensus is attained - frankieMR (talk) 17:10, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:23, 11 May 2011 (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.