Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CLC bio

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 No consensus. Cbrown1023 18:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CLC bio

CLC bio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

This is a procedural listing. This article was prodded back in November as "no evidence that co. meets the requirements of WP:CORP" and deleted on December 4. This deletion has now been contested. No opinion on the merits. Mackensen (talk) 14:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Nothing here suggests that the WP:CORP guideline is met, or that this business's offerings would be of wide interest to any other than a small market of specialists. - Smerdis of Tlön 15:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep (I'm the one who contested the deletion) The software of this company is used in several scientific publications, e.g. http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/72/11/7311 or http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1742-4658.2006.05397.x?cookieSet=1 Rewireable 22:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep This company may not be a huge enterprise, but their software has changed the perception of bioinformatics software within this market. Furthermore the number of unique users shows a remarkable penetration within the scientific segment, suggesting it is a well-known brand within scientific circles. Another point why this article shouldn't be deleted is the fact that they have invented a highly unique and innovative product: CLC Bioinformatics Cube --Don G. 16:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, no reliable secondary sources are cited which would establish notability. It doesn't matter if everyone and his dog uses the software, or if it changed the perception of the Earth, Sun, and stars, it matters if there's nontrivial reliable source material that reports on that. Seraphimblade 09:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

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.