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 keep. (non-admin closure) — Sam Sailor 03:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ProjectWise[edit]

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

I'm still not seeing actually of actual substance, the listed sources are either PR, trivial mentions or simply unacceptable. SwisterTwister talk 16:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 16:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 16:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:12, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and copy edit. The topic meets WP:GNG, having received significant coverage in reliable book sources. See examples below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:13, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

Williams, T. (2007). Information Technology for Construction Managers, Architects and Engineers. Thomson Delmar Learning. pp. 6–17. ISBN 978-1-4180-3958-5. (subscription required)
Asian Architect and Contractor. Thompson Press Hong Kong. 2003. pp. 146–147.
Eynon, J. (2016). Construction Manager's BIM Handbook. Wiley. pp. 216– . ISBN 978-1-118-89646-4. (subscription required)
Eastman, C.; Teicholz, P.; Sacks, R.; Liston, K. (2011). BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors. Wiley. pp. 144– . ISBN 978-1-118-02169-9. (subscription required)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:28, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Northamerica1000's assessment. Aust331 (talk) 07:00, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. KGirlTrucker81^{talk what I'm been doing} 23:57, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The votes above seem to be based only from the listed sources above, but this also means they are ignoring why I nominated for AfD, the PROD removal of this was unconvincing; the listed sources are not as substantial as they would need to be. SwisterTwister talk 00:00, 17 August 2016 (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.