Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sensomusic Usine

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 Shirahadasha (talk) 05:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sensomusic Usine

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Sensomusic Usine (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is entirely based from primary sources and there do not appear to be any non-primary reliable sources about this piece of software. There are relatively few google hits ~1500 and the vast majority of them are download sites, trivial listings, and blogs/forums (in other words, no reliable sources). FYI, the current text of the page is promo material from their own website, which is clearly a COI, even if it isn't a copyright violation. Also possibly of note is the fact that external links to their website have been being placed in similar articles such as Ableton Live and Max (software) (they have since been removed). Wickethewok (talk) 19:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Scott.wheeler (talk) 18:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. I can't find any third-party reliable sources for this which would make it notable software.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 03:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Usine is a young soft (a year) and has a 2000 users community which increase around 20% each month... How can you decide that it's not a 'notable' soft? I'm a spammer because I've included a link on max/msp page? If you look at the French version you will see that the page contains around 10 links to related softwares... So on the English version of the article I have only reproduce the same kind of link. If I resume the 'related software' section is allowed in French but not in English? Also the article has been rewritten to fit to 'wiki spirit'. (Olivier Sens) talk to Sensomusic 14:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. No indication of notability. Doctorfluffy (talk) 15:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I second that ! i'm a Usine user and i suppose that all software have begun small , right ...?
, and wikipedia can help little software to grow...
and i don't think that 1500 hits in google are a " few " hits !!!
in life , little things can be important too...
thanks to read , have a good day
nay-seven —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.91.242.214 (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I find this incredible. This software completely changed my way of music making. Is that unnotable? It practically made possible the concept of my group of live improvised electronic music. Is that unnotable? And I know I'm not alone 'cause I can see the buzz and the spark in the Usine forum community. This is no meaningless spam entry.
I just googled for Usine myself and found this quote so that someone had written on harmony-central.com. It almost made me cry - it's so much to the point of what I'm saying here.
Link to quote
Also check out kvraudio.com and similar places for third-party entries.
Right now my faith in Wikipedia is about to fade. I'm sure there's a tiny space on your server for Usine.
best regards
antwan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.194.97 (talk) 19:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• As I said to the article creator on my talk page, Wikipedia articles need to be based on reliable and independent sources. This naturally excludes press releases, blog/forum posts, and other such things. What is needed here would be secondary published reviews, such as in a music technology magazine, newspaper, or something of that sort. Wickethewok (talk) 22:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
  

I hope the format of my comment is not inappropriate; I am not confident of customs and protocol of my Wikipedia correspondence, apologies in advance. Recently I have used it for several performances with my group 3 Pups Music at a noteable music festival, the Sonic Arts Festival at University of Arkansas, USA in December 2007. I have watched Sensomusic's Usine community both from correspondences, website publications and forum posts made on the forum websites at http://www.kvraudio.com and http://www.sensomusic.com for about the past 2-3 years. I am aware through correspondences, website publications and forum posts that the software is used by other musicians in locations in several different countries. I have used Usine as a musician myself for about the last 2 years in its free version, and have been using the full commercial version of the software for about the last 4-6 months. I think it would be a mistake to refuse Usine an entry in Wikipedia.



me again, to Wickethewok :
are you really sure that music technology magazine and newspaper are " independent sources "...?
read some of them ( try "keyboards recording magazine " for example...maybe you see that time to time web forums can be a better info sources
just my 2 cents
nay-seven

my name is Stefanus Vivens,(you'll find me in google, but there is no 1500 hits!) i'm a professionnal musician since 1989. Those later years i worked on Reason(license), Ableton Live(license), MAX/MSP... i decided to grow up with Sensomusic Usine now(license), because it is a very open software, always in development, with free updates, where i'm free to do all i want. And because it is a software done by a musician for musicians, for a very special use, because it is all modular, with some audio to midi translation, analysis, and so easy to use compared to MAX/MSP, Reaktor. Usine can work with MAX and Reaktor; since the begining Usine is fully VST...next step is a VST plugg version,in order to be used with Ableton Live, Cubase, Logic...(etc) so why don't reference it? I think that maybe there is a preconception for this almost free software. about externals links, this is an extract of the Wikipedia MAX article: >>> ""Native Instruments markets a similar software called Reaktor. Reaktor is generally considered easier to use and learn than Max, albeit less powerful.

Apple has a very similar program called Quartz Composer focused on graphical compositions and there is also a free (for non-commercial use) software developed by meso called VVVV (a multipurpose toolkit) focused on real time video synthesis."" <<< with respect, Stéfanus Vivens —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.24.234.109 (talk) 13:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

-I'm a sound enginer and I use Usine a lot. Usine is a powerful audio software that help us to do what we can't do with other classic DAW. It's better than Synthedit, easier than Max/Msp, and it is developped by Oliver Senso. His software deserve a wikipedia article, without any doubt. Sorry for my bad english. Moody

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.