Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cerebro (software)
- 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. Article is still being repaired, but foreign-language sources are improving. Notability seems established by links to movies it has been used in. Not completely promotional at the moment. Needs more work. closing as No Consensus to Delete (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Cerebro (software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Promotion for non-notable software product, article by single-purpose user with possible conflict of interest. I have been unable to find any significant coverage, and the article gives none. Haakon (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
keep - At the moment, all the articles about Cerebro so far only in Russian, i added more articles (three short of them in English) in the links section, give us a little time and we will have articles and reviews in English. Number of users (working under movies w/ VFX) that used Cerebro - already large enough! I also would like to actively participate in wikipedia life to add and edit all stuff about other software for VFX and CG.--Khar khar (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC) — Khar khar (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- There is no requirement that sources be in English, FYI. --Cybercobra (talk) 01:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Haakon (talk) 00:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Sources in English are preferable, but if the sources simply are in Russian, that doesn't make it non-notable in an international Encyclopedia. Some topics simply are not discussed primarily in English, but are still discussed. LotLE×talk 08:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 17:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Blogs are blogs, even if they are in Russian. Where is the non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications? JBsupreme (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for remove the link to the forum, you're right, it was not necessary! Rigth now in the links section only 2 from 10 looks like blog. By the way, I see good text in 18 issue of Cinefex (russia version) in part about «Black lightning» (producer Timur Bekmambetov) it is normal paper journal, this short toc. How can I add it as a reference?--Khar khar (talk) 22:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I create ref. to Cinefex article--Khar khar (talk) 12:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for remove the link to the forum, you're right, it was not necessary! Rigth now in the links section only 2 from 10 looks like blog. By the way, I see good text in 18 issue of Cinefex (russia version) in part about «Black lightning» (producer Timur Bekmambetov) it is normal paper journal, this short toc. How can I add it as a reference?--Khar khar (talk) 22:33, 18 January 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.