Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Home Assistant (2nd nomination)

Home Assistant

[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)

The article is very promotional in tone, but that wouldn't necessarily be a problem if I was able to find any reliable sources that would allow it to be pruned and made respectable. My problem is that, while there are 65 references in the article, they are almost all either download sites, affiliated sites, or WP:UGC websites for enthusiasts to share experiences. There are a couple of potentially RS refs that I can read, to TechHive and Gizmodo, but they only mention the subject in passing and offer no substantive content. There's also a Wired article which seems either to be paywalled so I haven't been able to review that. Based on what I see however, I'm not convinced that WP:GNG is satisfied. I have looked for better sourcing, and drawn a blank, but I confess that software is not my forte so would be willing to withdraw if someone with more familiarity with the subject is able to improve the sourcing. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:GNG, given references are self-published ones CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. KidAd • SPEAK 23:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am a core contributor to Home Assistant. We have put out a call for help improving the article and have received a wealth of suggested fixes which I will implement over the next few days, including adding more and new sources. I expect once this is done the article will pass muster. It would be helpful if you could point out any specific areas that need improvement as I am new to editing WP and don’t know all of the guidelines like you professionals do. Robbiet480 (talk) 03:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Robbiet480 I've changed your !vote to 'keep', which is the normal language used in discussions like this. In my view, there are two issues with the article at present. The first one is the language used, which is not compliant with our manual of style - it's too promotional, and overall it reads more like a product brochure than an encyclopedia article. However, if that were the only problem, I would have fixed it myself rather than nominating for deletion; the more substantive problem is that I can find no significant coverage of the software in independent reliable sources - all of the sourcing in the article is either user-generated, self-published, affiliated or otherwise inappropriate, and I can find nothing better online. What you need to do is identify decent sourcing that an article could be written around. Best GirthSummit _(blether) 07:02, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Here's a list of third party references I found quickly: —Mrand ^{Talk • C}
- https://www.linux.com/topic/embedded-iot/home-assistant-python-approach-home-automation/
- https://voicebot.ai/2020/09/26/whats-next-for-stanford-university-open-source-virtual-assistant-almond-an-interview-with-principal-developer-giovanni-campagna/
- https://www.androidcentral.com/whats-home-assistant-and-why-should-home-automation-enthusiasts-consider-it
- https://www.cnx-software.com/2020/12/16/odroid-n2-based-home-assistant-blue-announced-as-official-hardware-for-home-assistant/
- https://www.geeky-gadgets.com/raspberry-pi-home-automation-20-01-2020/
- https://hub.packtpub.com/home-assistant-an-open-source-python-home-automation-hub-to-rule-all-things-smart/
- Mrand These are independent of the subject, but which of them do you think are reliable? Are they not all UGC of one form or another? GirthSummit _(blether) 15:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Disregarding the promotional tone of the article and focusing only on the notability, this seems fairly well covered in the tech press. I note that Stacey on IoT seems to regularly cover Home Assistant, is unaffiliated with them, and looks like a niche independent tech media blog with professional editorial standards. I also see a profile on Home Assistant from The Ambient, which seems to be in a similar category. Neither of them has a Wikipedia page, but both are indexed by Google News. I am also seeing a profile in Linux.com, which does have a wikipedia page. There is also a Dutch-language profile on the founder and project at Tweakers, written by the Editor-in-Chief (which is what Google Translate tells me "Hoofdredacteur" means). I haven't gone through all of the copious references here, but I think this is one of the more notable software packages I've seen with Wikipedia pages and I think it definitely clears the GNG bar — it's certainly not all UGC or non-RS content.

It is true that a lot of the references are not evidence of notability (they are serving a different purpose in the article), but buried among them is some clear evidence of significant and direct coverage, in my opinion. 0x0077BE ^{(talk · contrib)} 15:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]