This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Padrino Framework, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.padrinorb.com/pages/why. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:31, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Padrino Framework, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Tikiwont (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well you'd better waited for an answer by me. What should you do now or rather later when the software becomes more notable is write a fresh user space draft based on interdependent reliable sources and then talk to the admin Jayjg that actually closed the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Padrino (software) and deleted the article. I only removed the duplicate and this repost.--Tikiwont (talk) 11:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well would be better if people before delete some thing give some accurate verifications because we are on Google we have a lot of latest results we have a lot of mentions and Links and some tell us that we need to be more notable!!!
If you reread above you'll see that the deletion was not based on a whim but based on a recent assessment. Beyond mentions, reliable third party sources is the only thing that counts. Please also note than my Google hits will not necessarily be the same as yours, so some effort in identifying them is needed instead of asking others to do the searching. I described how to proceed in my second post. Personally I'd wait some time. At least until you've cooled down. It is easier the stronger your references are. Maybe even some other enthusiastic user puts it up later. There are many other topics that could meanwhile benefit from your expertise.--Tikiwont (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okey but it's a little strange that Wikipedia depends on a Google results, for example in the Ruby Lang scene RubyInside is the most important source of news and this post can tell a little about our popularity without consider this or our official repository. Yes I can wait but I disagree with the attitude to "mark a deletion" without an accurate motivation or a specific background because in this case any ruby programmer user know (or can know) us.
Wikipedia does not depend on Google hits. It was you who posted them above. Rather it depends on well documented secondary sources that you sometimes can find via google but if you have a published journal writing about Padrino that's also fine. In any case it's different than firsthand knowledge by Ruby programmers or inside blogs. It may look strange because this is your topic, but it is a useful framework where anybody writes about anything. I dare you to try it out. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned google hits only because some guys "ask for deletion" saying about few "google results" and it was correct because we launch the site in the meanwhile we write the wikipage. So in the Ruby scene what can be a reliable source? I need to ask to Ruby Author, Matz? Write a book? Im a ruby programmer from a lot of years and today best reliable sources as mentioned is github and rubyinside and few others.
It talks about Ghits but also about Rubyinside and Github, so basically we have no new information. As already said, maybe it's too fresh. Take your time, there are ways to amend and when i said to try it out I actually meant to try to participate in this project here beyond your specific interest. Best--Tikiwont (talk) 14:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okey! Good! Let's me know what do you think about and when we can try to create a new wikipage.
The Ruby framework has been to DRV already and restoration was rejected soundly. Please stop posting essentially the same stuff unless and until you've understood the concept of writing an article based independent reliable sources, that are not connected to you. Adding also a blog post by your colleague as new evidence is actuality insulting and if you continue you'll be blocked from editing.--Tikiwont (talk) 13:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Padrino (software). Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
