Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zammad

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. Insufficient discussion to establish notability, but sources might exist in German. — Wug·a·po·des 01:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zammad

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Article about a piece of software sourced entirely to self-published or related sources. A search for other possible sources shows nothing better that would indicate notability. Mccapra (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mccapra: I have added further secondary sources to the article to underline notability. What do you think? --Schokita (talk) 08:18, 04 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article is currently based on 16 secondary sources (as well as 28 primary sources). How many secondary sources would be required for notability? Schokita (talk) 16:48, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the additional sources are certainly an improvement. I’m not sure whether they’re enough to establish notability. Let’s see what the consensus of other editors is. Mccapra (talk) 10:33, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No claims in the article that meet WP:GNG google search does not find anything. As mentioned, references all seem to be primary sources. Jeepday (talk) 19:15, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:24, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It seems it has received coverage in a number of German-language sources, and it has a long-standing article on the German Wikipedia. --Un assiolo (talk) 12:51, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:55, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment can the “keep” voters share the best three pieces of coverage of this topic in reliable independent sources? It’s not relevant to this discussion whether or not there’s a long-standing article on de.wiki (there are thousands of articles on en.wiki that don’t meet our notability requirements. We just haven’t got round to deleting them yet and de.wiki is no different). Mccapra (talk) 03:46, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources cited in the article include Linux-Magazin, heise.de, LANline, golem.de and t3n. I think this shows that "it is discussed in reliable sources as significant in its particular field", as WP:NSOFTWARE puts it. --Un assiolo (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2021 (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.