Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CodeBeamer (software) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/CodeBeamer_(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 keep. Jayjg ^(talk) 04:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CodeBeamer (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)

I cannot find any significant coverage for this software product. Fails WP:GNG. Haakon (talk) 18:38, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 20:32, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed to Keep: Per below. Joe Chill (talk) 22:26, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. (for now) The ddj award comes with a little review. Also, this seems academic software, mentioned quite a little in publications: [1] [2]. Pcap ping 20:37, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reviewed in depth here (toc), which is a heise.de publication. Pcap ping 21:20, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think the sources are good enough. Rkr1991 ^{(Wanna chat?)} 14:13, 30 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.