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. I'm a bit taken aback that the only keep votes seem to be from SPAs, but the lack of participation makes it hard to judge, so I can't really see a consensus.
Dennis Brown -
2¢ 17:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Does not appear to be notable software; I could only find a single significant hit (in German), which appears to be some kind of blog and thus isn't exactly a reliable source. I couldn't find anything else other than the usual tech question sites and sites that host the code (like GitHub and SourceForge).
Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 13:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. Narutolovehinata5 and I did not find evidence that it is a piece of notable software. Searched article and internet.
Knox490 (
talk) 14:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. CANpie is a predecessor to
SocketCAN, as the maintainer and lead-developer of SocketCAN said himself in his dissertation (German
[1]). While SocketCAN is not real-time capable as such, because it depends on the non-real-time Linux kernel scheduler, CANpie is an real-time capable alternative and still actively maintained. CANpie is also used in non-Linux environments like on QNX, Windows, macOS, and bare metal. CANpie presumably will become the defacto standard API for CAN based applications by
CAN in Automation. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
MisterTS (
talk •
contribs) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment For classical
CAN bus applications and the new
CAN FD standard the article references a standard API (like e.g.
can4linux or
SocketCAN) which is widely used in industrial embedded systems and research facilities. Please refer to the
iCC 2017 conference papers. For the same reason (".. anything else other than the usual tech question sites ..") you could mark e.g
can4linux for deletion, what definitely makes no sense. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dolores88 (
talk •
contribs) 16:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment15 minutes from creation to AfD. Way to go, guys 8-(
Andy Dingley (
talk) 17:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Diploma theses (Gajdos, English
[9]) (Blumenthal, German
[10])
Keep Additional references have been added to the article which disprove the reason for AFD (Does not appear to be notable software), links to commercial products have not been added. Open for more comments in order to improve the page.
Dolores88 (
talk) 11:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: More discussion is needed on the quality of sources to satisfy
WP:GNG
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
‑Scottywong| gossip _ 00:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
CommentOnly keep voices look like SPA users. References here and in the article are too weak to show notability. Sole source close to RS is CVUT diploma thesis (master/Ing. degree I think), but this has only single mention of CANpie. I will look for better sources, but for now, I´m leaning to delete.
Pavlor (
talk) 05:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
I browsed all other linked research papers (ICC, other thesis) and again only passing mention (or even no mention at all!). Still no luck in usual online/published technology sources.
Pavlor (
talk) 05:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. CANpie is a notable piece of software in the area of embedded control devices. And don't compare the visibility of it in the media with standard software products for desktop computers. It is the only open source software API I'm aware of for different CAN Bus based protocols. I is different to SocketCAN and
can4linux because the API can be used not only on Linux but especially in deeply embedded devices with or without operating systems. In this sense it is a more generic approach than the others mentioned.
Plupp (
talk) 09:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
To prove notability, you need coverage of the article subject in reliable source (eg. reviews in published/online magazines etc.). No exceptions...
Pavlor (
talk) 10:22, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
As requested, a list of reliable sources ( published/online magazines)
Technik+Einkauf, Nr. 1 / 2014, p. 70 -73
Dolores88 (
talk) 12:09, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Both vogel.de portals look like RS (first one is short news only, the second is broader). Can´t judge CAN newsletter - I have bad feeling they publish what companies send them. I don´t have access to last two offline sources.
Pavlor (
talk) 14:55, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
@
Pavlor: Shall I provide a copy of the print media? Any recommended practice?
Dolores88 (
talk) 16:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Posting copyrighted material is not ideal. Do you know web pages of these magazines, so I can verify their publishing policy? I trust you these articles do exist, I only don´t know, if these magazines are RS by Wikipedia rules.
Pavlor (
talk) 17:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
If these two magazines are
http://www.embedded-design.net/ and
http://www.technik-einkauf.de/, then most important factor is origin of magazine articles, as both accept texts as paid advertising - only articles written by magazine staff are (probably) RS, which may be hard to find in such magazine.
Pavlor (
talk) 05:14, 5 May 2017 (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.
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. I'm a bit taken aback that the only keep votes seem to be from SPAs, but the lack of participation makes it hard to judge, so I can't really see a consensus.
Dennis Brown -
2¢ 17:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Does not appear to be notable software; I could only find a single significant hit (in German), which appears to be some kind of blog and thus isn't exactly a reliable source. I couldn't find anything else other than the usual tech question sites and sites that host the code (like GitHub and SourceForge).
Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 13:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. Narutolovehinata5 and I did not find evidence that it is a piece of notable software. Searched article and internet.
Knox490 (
talk) 14:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. CANpie is a predecessor to
SocketCAN, as the maintainer and lead-developer of SocketCAN said himself in his dissertation (German
[1]). While SocketCAN is not real-time capable as such, because it depends on the non-real-time Linux kernel scheduler, CANpie is an real-time capable alternative and still actively maintained. CANpie is also used in non-Linux environments like on QNX, Windows, macOS, and bare metal. CANpie presumably will become the defacto standard API for CAN based applications by
CAN in Automation. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
MisterTS (
talk •
contribs) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment For classical
CAN bus applications and the new
CAN FD standard the article references a standard API (like e.g.
can4linux or
SocketCAN) which is widely used in industrial embedded systems and research facilities. Please refer to the
iCC 2017 conference papers. For the same reason (".. anything else other than the usual tech question sites ..") you could mark e.g
can4linux for deletion, what definitely makes no sense. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dolores88 (
talk •
contribs) 16:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment15 minutes from creation to AfD. Way to go, guys 8-(
Andy Dingley (
talk) 17:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Diploma theses (Gajdos, English
[9]) (Blumenthal, German
[10])
Keep Additional references have been added to the article which disprove the reason for AFD (Does not appear to be notable software), links to commercial products have not been added. Open for more comments in order to improve the page.
Dolores88 (
talk) 11:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: More discussion is needed on the quality of sources to satisfy
WP:GNG
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
‑Scottywong| gossip _ 00:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
CommentOnly keep voices look like SPA users. References here and in the article are too weak to show notability. Sole source close to RS is CVUT diploma thesis (master/Ing. degree I think), but this has only single mention of CANpie. I will look for better sources, but for now, I´m leaning to delete.
Pavlor (
talk) 05:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
I browsed all other linked research papers (ICC, other thesis) and again only passing mention (or even no mention at all!). Still no luck in usual online/published technology sources.
Pavlor (
talk) 05:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Keep. CANpie is a notable piece of software in the area of embedded control devices. And don't compare the visibility of it in the media with standard software products for desktop computers. It is the only open source software API I'm aware of for different CAN Bus based protocols. I is different to SocketCAN and
can4linux because the API can be used not only on Linux but especially in deeply embedded devices with or without operating systems. In this sense it is a more generic approach than the others mentioned.
Plupp (
talk) 09:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
To prove notability, you need coverage of the article subject in reliable source (eg. reviews in published/online magazines etc.). No exceptions...
Pavlor (
talk) 10:22, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
As requested, a list of reliable sources ( published/online magazines)
Technik+Einkauf, Nr. 1 / 2014, p. 70 -73
Dolores88 (
talk) 12:09, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Both vogel.de portals look like RS (first one is short news only, the second is broader). Can´t judge CAN newsletter - I have bad feeling they publish what companies send them. I don´t have access to last two offline sources.
Pavlor (
talk) 14:55, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
@
Pavlor: Shall I provide a copy of the print media? Any recommended practice?
Dolores88 (
talk) 16:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Posting copyrighted material is not ideal. Do you know web pages of these magazines, so I can verify their publishing policy? I trust you these articles do exist, I only don´t know, if these magazines are RS by Wikipedia rules.
Pavlor (
talk) 17:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)reply
If these two magazines are
http://www.embedded-design.net/ and
http://www.technik-einkauf.de/, then most important factor is origin of magazine articles, as both accept texts as paid advertising - only articles written by magazine staff are (probably) RS, which may be hard to find in such magazine.
Pavlor (
talk) 05:14, 5 May 2017 (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.