Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/METRiQ

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. Deor (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

METRiQ

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

Non-notable software product (fails WP:SOFTWARE and WP:GNG). I'm nominating this and two other articles (Medical translation and regulatory translation) created by a user whose edits, as indicated by the language used and sourcing entirely to for-profit translation organizations, suggests WP:PROMO. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. With no claim of importance, it seems to meet CSD A7. Oleaster (talk·contribs) 19:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC). Except of course in that it is software, which isn't covered under A7 at all. 08:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I found mention of several pieces of software on a Books search, but nothing related to translation projects. A regular Google search turns up many small companies called Metriq, but none of them are related to this software. The company that makes it is mentioned here and here and here, but their software is not. Fails WP:GNG. Oleaster (talk·contribs) 08:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article fails to provide any reliable sources that show any sort of Notability. Searches are mostly showing press release and other first-party controlled content and are not showing that MMETRiQ is the "subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources". Appears to purely be WP:Promo.Stesmo (talk) 00:44, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up no significant RS coverage of this software.Dialectric (talk) 15:09, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Though some half-hearted effort was made to conceal its promotional nature, the article is nothing but an advertisement for a firm to which medical professionals can outsource translation-related tasks. METRiQ is apparently what the company calls its custom web interface used for client–business interaction rather than actual translation software and as such it would need an extraordinary amount of independent coverage indeed to be eligible for its own Wikipedia article. Such coverage is non-existent and thus the article ought to be deleted. Iaritmioawp (talk) 08:02, 6 November 2014 (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.