Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of causal mapping software

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. Feel free to AfD again if desired. Missvain (talk) 03:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of causal mapping software

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Doesn't warrant a stand-alone list: I can find plenty of sources discussing "causal mapping software", but only in the context of "X is a causal mapping software application", not as a set. The list contents are all non-notable with only one exception (which in itself wouldn't make much of a list), and the sources cited for them are just the developers' websites. I also suspect there's a COI behind this, which may be why this was created in the first place. Draftifying the article presumably won't help, as it's unlikely that well-sourced articles on enough many of these apps will be created within the c. 6 months allowed. Therefore I say delete now, and create again if and when there is substance to warrant that. Fails WP:GNG / WP:NLIST. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Using WP:NLIST, causal maps are themselves notable, and this is simply a list of software about them. It would not make sense to merge this into that article as it would be too large, so stand-alone makes sense. The entries in the lists do not need to be notable themselves (per NLIST). Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:00, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I know that all items in the list don't need to be notable in their own right, but when only one is, it begs the question how notable is the concept, really? The other way to satisfy notability is if the list or group is discussed as a whole, and per my nom, I couldn't find any sources for that. Also, just so we're clear, here we're talking about the notability of causal mapping software, not causal maps per se; there isn't even an article on CM software. Also perhaps worth noting that the causal map article was very recently authored by the same editor as this one, with the possible same COI issues, and I'm not entirely sure its notability has been fully tested yet (and no, it's not what's on trial here, but neither does it make an entirely convincing 'character witness' IMO). --DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Good grief, no notable links, just a collection of website links. WP:LISTN. Ajf773 (talk) 09:54, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the topic is notable and it makes good sense to have a list of software instances, both free and commercial, that support the technique. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:45, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, how is this topic notable? Ajf773 (talk) 10:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Only one of these is bluelinked is Quirkos. I also suspect that Causal map is a duplicate of Cause–effect graph, but that's beyond the scope of this AfD. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 15:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I agree with what I take LaundryPizza03 to be saying, that an appropriate test of this list would be that enough of the software listed was notable, and am concerned that only Quirkos is bluelinked. At least some of the others do reach GNG standard, though: cf. Google Scholar hits for Dagitty is certainly there, and both Cognizer and Insight Maker are probably OK as well. — Charles Stewart (talk) 09:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I did some digging in Google Scholar and proper. It seems like causal mapping software is not mentioned as a group, as WP:NLIST seems to require for inclusion in Wikipedia: One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. The wording "one reason" leaves room for other reasons, which I haven't seen in this discussion, though. Failing the "one criterion" is similar to failing WP:GNG, so that may also be the reason why Causal mapping software doesn't exist. By contrast, diagram software, of which CMS is a subgroup, is mentioned as a group in a way that satisfies the NLIST criterion, e. g. a Source forge software comparison. Therefore, I'd propose we rename to Diagram software and merge in the table in Comparison of network diagram software. Diagram software should include the merged table, or two tables, and a general discussion of diagram software uses, including networks and causal channels. We shouldn't just make a list since there is no general article yet. We can perhaps use some material from the Comparison of network software article, but it is entirely unsourced and might need an AfD, too. ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 02:55, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2021 (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.