Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ProjectCodeMeter Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ProjectCodeMeter

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. -- Cirt (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ProjectCodeMeter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Contested PROD. Original reasoning was Not need only three notable software items. See also link is sufficient.. Article also has no sources and so qualifies as WP:OR.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 03:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; my searching shows no evidence of any, let alone of significant, coverage in a reliable source.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 05:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep; this article covers a software which is an important milestone in Cost Estimation and Project Management technology, as it's partially automated. The validity of this article is as any of the software articles listed on this page (which have no better references): http://en.wikipedia.orghttps://demo.azizisearch.com/lite/wikipedia/page/Comparison_of_project_management_software

Franklin90210 (talk) 14:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.

• Delete. Yet another non-notable software product relating to the supervision of computer programmers: an automatic source code analysis software, which estimates software development time and cost, measures code quality, and team productivity. Yes, the "project management" software page is still a mess. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - article lacks 3rd party refs needed to establish notability. Dialectric (talk) 17:13, 17 May 2011 (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.