Talk:Topincs

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it completes information available on rapid application development tools in Wikipedia.

Topincs is also used by the University of Pavia for some projects see Maicher, Lutz, Khalil Ahmed, Alida Isolani, Aki Kivelä, Sam Oh, Antony Pitts & Salvatore Vassallo. “Topic Maps in the eHumanities.” In 2009 Fith IEEE International Conference on eScience, 6-13. Oxford: IEEE Computer Society, 2009. doi:10.1109/e-Science.2009.9. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.77.12.74 (talk) 13:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I, Robert Cerny, want to contest deletion and will try to answer all questions that arose so far and any that might arise subsequently. Right now i will cover the following points:

Intention: It is not true that my intention was promotional. A while ago i stumbled across the List of rapid application development (RAD) tools on Wikipedia and within it, the section on web based RAD tools. But this list was incomplete. My primary intention was to complete the list of web-based RAD tools which Topincs indisputably is. When taking a closer look at the list, i realized that every single one of the products on this page has an Wikipedia article. To be in-line i created one.

Regarding the deletion of Topincs out of this list: it puzzles me, that one can delete one item of a list without checking all other items, if they should not be deleted for the same reason. Every single article, that the RAD list links to, is product oriented and promotional in nature.

Neutral point of view: It is true that the author of the article has a very close connection to the subject. I am the author of both and I never wanted to disguise that fact, so i chose my real name for the Wikipedia account. And there is no doubt, i am biased. Nevertheless i tried to be neutral and will add a section on challenges one has to face when applying Topincs. Also, any claim that i make in this Wikipedia article can be verified, if one digs deeper into the subject. But it requires time and expertise.

Significance: While Topincs is a small project, there is a number of applications which are mostly scientific in nature. I will add a section on use cases in science and reference the relevant papers. I intentionally omitted this section, because i did not want the article to look like an advertisement. Maybe a senior Wikipedian can advise if this would rather go on the main page or on the talk page.

Promotional nature: While the article is (like all other product articles on Wikipedia) somewhat promotional, it is not with commercial intentions. After all Topincs is free for many use-cases, in particular scientific and non-profit oriented. Again, i am asking for some concrete advice on how to make the article look less promotional and be in line with Wikipedia guidelines. Many thanks in advance. Robert Cerny (talk) 12:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

Rather than add sections, you would be as well to add references. You don't have any, and without them there's no chance. Read WP:RS about reliable independent sources. As to promo, that's a minor point. It's the lack of apparent notability (see WP:GNG) that's the main problem. Being totally free, non-profit, for-profit, charity or trading solely by barter makes no difference. If something can't show that it is of note to anyone other than its creators or members or vendors/distributors, then it doesn't belong in an encyclopaedia. Avoid words like 'offers', 'solutions', and anything that only a PR department would use. You do need to show that it's more than a nice little niche product beloved by its 16 users. Peridon (talk) 13:27, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW please sign in and sign your posts on talk pages with four ~ things. This puts the time and date stamp on, and we know who is who. Peridon (talk) 13:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added references to my papers which underwent a scientific conference peer review process. It is my opinion that an encyclopedia has the obligation to give its readers a complete picture of a subject, in this case, the list of rapid application development tools, the page which i originally wanted to add Topincs to. The list is incomplete without Topincs. People visit this page to get an overview of the tools available. They have a right to find all tools for Rapid Application Development, not only the ones with more than 16 users. So, please, do not delete Topincs from Wikipedia and add the entry to the mentioned list again. It is not spam, it is science.Robert Cerny (talk) 12:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]