80:
455:, and name 2-3 specific examples for unbiased in-depth coverage from reliable sources. Marketing sites masquerading as independent reviewers don't count. Simple re-publications of company information, even on otherwise reliable sites, don't establish notability either, unless those "reviews" provide additional independent details and research from a qualified author.
544:
are offered services by CMS Critic, aptly labelled as "Advertising and
Services". Offers include useful features like pre-review audits, "fixing up" reviewed issues before publishing them, and even opting out entirely from a negative review. Some of those offers are a blatant violation of basic
473:
which happens to be an important news website about CMS software. This site is known for its unbiased and well researched editorial content which is created by authors who are regarded as an authority on CMS software. I don't think any of the references are from marketing websites portraying
316:
Non-notable software. Not one of the 16 listed sources is reliable (blogs, self-published information, PR interviews). The initial PROD was rejected by a second SPA account (with 2 edits). No in-depth coverage found via Google.
285:
87:
238:
675:
lack of good coverage as show by GermanJoe's reference analysis, even the above user, whose comment can be treated as a "delete" despite his recommendation, seems to agree.
279:
389:
There are a few sources for this, and it appears to be an established company, but none of the sources are terribly deep or reliable. So reluctantly keeping the the
334:
360:
551:
Ref #3 is a blogger review by "Emma McGowan: #feminist #blogger #sexpositive" with a "Love/hate relationship with #startups" (quoted from
Twitter account).
570:. Also, Content Management Software hasn't been "niche software" for several years now, this functionality has lots of providers and competing solutions.
536:
Ref #1 CMS Critic - a quick Google search reveals, that CMS Critic is not seen as unbiased (not even within the branche). More specifically:
517:
495:
Given that the article is about a niche software, it has been cited with good and reliable references. The article should not be deleted.--
245:
414:
Some of the references do provide deep and unbiased coverage. The article is about a notable niche software and should not be deleted.--
398:
390:
560:
Ref #7 is authored by a student for
Anglistic, Americanistic und Sociology - none of which provides expert knowledge of CMS systems.
211:
206:
96:
639:
521:
440:
215:
126:
557:
Ref #6 is arguably the best reference in this mess, but contains only a short 1-paragraph summary with a very basic description.
635:
436:
17:
198:
300:
267:
112:
613:
Some of the concerns about references stated above are valid, however i recommend that the article not be deleted.--
650:
590:
85:
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
722:
40:
680:
261:
513:
500:
402:
703:
684:
676:
665:
622:
606:
579:
504:
483:
464:
423:
406:
378:
352:
326:
257:
158:
63:
61:
631:
618:
509:
496:
479:
432:
419:
718:
661:
202:
36:
394:
307:
142:
116:
627:
614:
533:- source review to address the arguments of new editors here, especially the praise for CMS Critic:
475:
428:
415:
575:
460:
322:
293:
194:
101:
69:
603:
148:
79:
54:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
717:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
568:
none of those sources except #6 meets
Knowledge's criteria for an independent reliable source
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
548:
Ref #2 is a general product overview, clearly provided by the company (promotional language)
273:
571:
541:
456:
318:
693:
600:
448:
452:
176:
164:
132:
232:
111:
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
537:
469:
Some references are from company's own blog, however many references are from
366:
340:
566:
Not mentioned ref numbers are repetitions of listed cases. So no,
711:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
74:
653:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
593:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
470:
105:(agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments,
397:, I weakly advocate for a delete and take no joy in it. --
228:
224:
220:
599:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --
292:
692:- searches turned up nothing to show it's notable.
659:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
725:). No further edits should be made to this page.
335:list of Software-related deletion discussions
306:
125:Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected
95:among Knowledge contributors. Knowledge has
8:
359:Note: This debate has been included in the
333:Note: This debate has been included in the
361:list of India-related deletion discussions
358:
332:
99:regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
119:on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
554:Ref #5 is a blacklisted marketing site
7:
474:themselves as independent sources.--
393:out of my head and thinking only of
391:List of Content Management Systems
24:
563:Ref #8 is the company's own blog.
78:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
540:are the author's credentials.
1:
115:on the part of others and to
64:03:48, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
704:13:43, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
685:01:24, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
666:02:14, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
623:07:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
607:13:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
580:14:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
505:13:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
484:11:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
465:12:06, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
424:08:09, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
407:20:57, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
379:19:40, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
353:19:39, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
327:18:37, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
742:
714:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
545:journalistic standards.
157:; accounts blocked for
127:single-purpose accounts
97:policies and guidelines
640:few or no other edits
522:few or no other edits
441:few or no other edits
642:outside this topic.
524:outside this topic.
443:outside this topic.
109:by counting votes.
88:not a majority vote
668:
643:
609:
525:
444:
381:
355:
190:
189:
186:
113:assume good faith
733:
716:
700:
697:
664:
658:
656:
654:
625:
598:
596:
594:
507:
426:
412:Notable Software
376:
374:
373:
372:
350:
348:
347:
346:
311:
310:
296:
248:
236:
218:
184:
172:
156:
140:
121:
91:, but instead a
82:
75:
57:
34:
741:
740:
736:
735:
734:
732:
731:
730:
729:
723:deletion review
712:
698:
695:
677:Rainbow unicorn
669:
660:
649:
647:
610:
589:
587:
370:
368:
367:
365:
344:
342:
341:
339:
253:
244:
209:
193:
174:
162:
146:
130:
117:sign your posts
73:
55:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
739:
737:
728:
727:
707:
706:
687:
657:
646:
645:
644:
597:
586:
585:
584:
583:
582:
564:
561:
558:
555:
552:
549:
546:
527:
526:
510:Mejames.parker
497:Mejames.parker
489:
488:
487:
486:
467:
409:
383:
382:
356:
314:
313:
250:
188:
187:
83:
72:
67:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
738:
726:
724:
720:
715:
709:
708:
705:
702:
701:
691:
688:
686:
682:
678:
674:
671:
670:
667:
663:
662:North America
655:
652:
641:
637:
633:
629:
624:
620:
616:
612:
611:
608:
605:
602:
595:
592:
581:
577:
573:
569:
565:
562:
559:
556:
553:
550:
547:
543:
539:
535:
534:
532:
529:
528:
523:
519:
515:
511:
506:
502:
498:
494:
493:Deep Coverage
491:
490:
485:
481:
477:
472:
468:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
446:
445:
442:
438:
434:
430:
425:
421:
417:
413:
410:
408:
404:
400:
399:69.204.153.39
396:
395:WP:OTHERSTUFF
392:
388:
385:
384:
380:
377:
375:
362:
357:
354:
351:
349:
336:
331:
330:
329:
328:
324:
320:
309:
305:
302:
299:
295:
291:
287:
284:
281:
278:
275:
272:
269:
266:
263:
259:
256:
255:Find sources:
251:
247:
243:
240:
234:
230:
226:
222:
217:
213:
208:
204:
200:
196:
195:BlackMonk CMS
192:
191:
182:
178:
170:
166:
160:
154:
150:
144:
138:
134:
128:
124:
120:
118:
114:
108:
104:
103:
98:
94:
90:
89:
84:
81:
77:
76:
71:
70:BlackMonk CMS
68:
66:
65:
62:
59:
58:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
713:
710:
694:
689:
672:
648:
588:
567:
530:
492:
411:
386:
364:
338:
315:
303:
297:
289:
282:
276:
270:
264:
254:
241:
180:
168:
159:sockpuppetry
152:
141:; suspected
136:
122:
110:
106:
100:
92:
86:
56:Juliancolton
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
638:) has made
520:) has made
447:Please see
439:) has made
387:Weak Delete
280:free images
471:CMS Critic
93:discussion
719:talk page
628:Adamsevan
615:Adamsevan
572:GermanJoe
476:Reach.muz
457:GermanJoe
429:Reach.muz
416:Reach.muz
319:GermanJoe
149:canvassed
143:canvassed
102:consensus
37:talk page
721:or in a
651:Relisted
636:contribs
601:RoySmith
591:Relisted
518:contribs
437:contribs
239:View log
181:username
175:{{subst:
169:username
163:{{subst:
153:username
147:{{subst:
137:username
131:{{subst:
39:or in a
531:Comment
286:WP refs
274:scholar
212:protect
207:history
145:users:
690:Delete
673:Delete
604:(talk)
449:WP:GNG
258:Google
216:delete
50:delete
542:These
453:WP:RS
301:JSTOR
262:books
246:Stats
233:views
225:watch
221:links
123:Note:
52:. –
16:<
699:5969
696:Onel
681:talk
632:talk
619:talk
576:talk
538:this
514:talk
501:talk
480:talk
461:talk
451:and
433:talk
420:talk
403:talk
323:talk
294:FENS
268:news
229:logs
203:talk
199:edit
369:Mr
343:Mr
308:TWL
237:– (
177:csp
173:or
165:csm
133:spa
107:not
683:)
634:•
626:—
621:)
578:)
516:•
508:—
503:)
482:)
463:)
435:•
427:—
422:)
405:)
371:RD
363:.
345:RD
337:.
325:)
288:)
231:|
227:|
223:|
219:|
214:|
210:|
205:|
201:|
183:}}
171:}}
161::
155:}}
139:}}
129::
60:|
679:(
630:(
617:(
574:(
512:(
499:(
478:(
459:(
431:(
418:(
401:(
321:(
312:)
304:·
298:·
290:·
283:·
277:·
271:·
265:·
260:(
252:(
249:)
242:·
235:)
197:(
185:.
179:|
167:|
151:|
135:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
