Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chantra

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. Wizardman 22:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chantra[edit]

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

I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 23:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources, no article. Miami33139 (talk) 20:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep If an article has no sources, tag it as needing them, that's not a reason for a delete. If none can be found, then it can be tagged. Jumping straight to a delete request gives no-one a reasonable chance to respond, as not everyone lives on Wikipedia. The collection is also Thai, so deleting would be an example of cultural bias, as the sources are in Thai, and not easily traceable in English (and the translation has numerous other meanings in English). [1] perhaps? Tag as needing sources, and revisit later. Greenman (talk) 22:05, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The article has been around since early 2006 so if anyone wanted to improve it, it would have been improved without AFD. Joe Chill (talk) 23:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The WP:BURDEN to verify the article occur with the first edit to the article. The author should have included sources with the first edit and had them ready before beginning to write about the subject.. Miami33139 (talk) 08:20, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No third party reliable sources to establish notability. 16x9 (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 11:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. —Polarpanda (talk) 12:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability is not inherited, and it looks like this disc is simply a compilation that distributes software that could all be had from other sources, and as such seems trivial. This is like saying that since Jingle Bells is a notable song, if I make a holiday mix disc that contains Jingle Bells, my mix disc is an encyclopedia subject too. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:57, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Beyond the comments above, I strongly object to the charge that deleting an unsourced article involves cultural bias, just because the subject pertains to another country. WP:V is an absolute: "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation ... If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." Period. There is nothing in WP:V giving a free pass to article topics involving foreign countries. Ravenswing 16:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A fairly deep search resulted in finding one article in a relatively small Thai newspaper relating to this software. That's not enough to show notability. The inclusion of notable programs on the CD also does not establish notability, as mentioned previously. Transmissionelement (talk) 16:53, 18 December 2009 (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.