Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NormDis, normal probability distribution calculator

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NormDis, normal probability distribution calculator

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

Wikipedia's notability guideline on Internet content and a related essay on the notability of software give a number of guidelines on when it is normally appropriate to have a standalone article for web software. Quoting from the former, ""Notable" is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance," and even web content that editors personally believe are "important" or "famous" are only accepted as notable if they can be shown to have attracted notice. No web content is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of content it is. If the individual web content has received no or very little notice from independent sources, then it is not notable simply because other web content of its type are commonly notable or merely because it exists". This software does not have multiple non-trivial independent secondary sources describing it and hence ought not to have a standalone article. NW (Talk) 17:08, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As initiator of this article, all I can do is refer to Talk:NormDis, normal probability distribution calculator#Explanation and express my regret if it would be deleted. Asitgoes (talk) 17:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are we voting? My assessment/vote would be delete. Tayste (edits) 20:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Still has no claim or evidence of notability. "You can find this software online for free" doesn't really cut it. There is nothing there to merge, as none of it comes from WP:RS. The only reference cited is of the calculation method used, and not to the software itself. Agricolae (talk) 02:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable because of a lack of in-depth coverage in reliable sources. List of statistical packages contains a lot of properly notable software covered in book-length depth by prestigious publishing houses. This software is simply not in the same league, and does not meet basic notability requirements. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:07, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—Not finding sources sufficient for notability. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 17:20, 9 September 2013 (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.