Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genius Inside (3rd nomination)

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. postdlf (talk) 17:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Genius Inside[edit]

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

Previously deleted late last year as non-notable. Article seems sufficiently different to not be speedy eligible, so asking community to evaluate. Camw (talk) 13:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Theopolisme (talk) 00:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject is notable through multiple reliable sources citing it as international project management software and technology awards. Botidr 08:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete As far as I can tell, the awards are for software within the Lotus Notes community, not for project management software in general. This is not sufficient for notability. Since the WSJ article seems to be merely an announcement of the awards, I'm not sure its relevant for notability either. DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Wall Street Journal and multiple other awards should be enough on this one for notability. FifthCircuit (talk) 00:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete again broadly as per my position on the previous AfD. The WSJ piece that has been added is attributed there to "Marketwired" which describes itself as a "Newswire service for online press release distribution" [1] and is an announcement of an award from TopTenREVIEWS; neither the award nor the press release are clear evidence of notability. AllyD (talk) 05:55, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Though a few references should be cleaned up, subject received multiple awards deeming notability and there are numerous reliable sources noting this project management software. Rhaulumajik (talk) 16:13, 11 July 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.