Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MIDACO

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) Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MIDACO

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

Seems like outright WP:SOAPBOX. bender235 (talk) 14:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

comment: I am the creator of the article. I removed any text passage that might be considered "written like an advertisement".

Additional (primary) sources for notability can be found here: http://www.midaco-solver.com/index.php/about/publications

Additional (secondary) sources for notability can be found here: http://www.midaco-solver.com/index.php/about/applications

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am admittedly not an expert on software, but it does appear to be notable, given that two articles in a seemingly reliable journal (cited in the article) give it substantial mention. The problem of soapboxing has mostly been dealt with, and I pruned another little bit: I don't think it qualifies for deletion as a promotional piece any longer. Vanamonde (talk) 17:34, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Borderline, but I would lean to keep as long as it stays neutral in tone. Quite a niche appeal however. W Nowicki (talk) 23:03, 26 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.