Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ClearNLP

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. Davewild (talk) 07:41, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ClearNLP

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

Article about a software project. Fails WP:GNG notability. - Mr X 17:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ClearNLP has been widely used in many Natural Language Processing communities just like OpenNLP or Mallet. Please consider this to be in Wikipedia; I believe many people will benefit from this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdchoi77 (talk • contribs) 18:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdchoi77, if you are actually J D Choi, i.e. one of the principal authors of the tool, perhaps you could add references to the article? Searching google scholar for clearnlp choi and mccallum 2013 is one place to start. Mallet (software project) needs references too. - Pointillist (talk) 07:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Pointillist, I added several references to the ClearNLP page, including the Choi & McCallum, 2013. I will try to add more information. - Jdchoi77, 7 May 2015.

@Jdchoi77, If you could add some references authored by third parties who cite your papers, that would help to convince... - Pointillist (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as is, unless somebody seriously improves "bad vanispamcruft" into "referenced, proper stub" before this AFD hits its timeout. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 06:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - software project of unclear notability, lacking independent refs. All refs provided are papers authored or co-authored by JD Choi. Article was created by an SPA as possibly promotional. A search turned up no significant, independent RS coverage. Dialectric (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - regrettably because IMO this topic fits within a notable path of research. However seeing that the original author hasn't contributed anywhere else and apparently isn't prepared to collaborate here there's no justification for the current article to stay. Single-purpose – and indeed single-interest – contributors are not generally desirable because they tend to be unacceptably biased. That doesn't mean I accept that Jdchoi77 (talk · contribs) is J D Choi – indeed I'm inclined to doubt it: I've not seen other academics perform so ineffectively on wikipedia: people with genuine research skill usually do quite well here. - Pointillist (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2015 (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.