notability and sourcing Dear 74 thank you for your answer I really appreciate the way you propose to communicate as it gives more comfort for both of us and builds dialog and consensus Thank you for your suggestions on how to improve this article I agree with them but I think I should first follow Fiddle Faddle s suggestion that the first task is to show and prove notability though I fully understand and agree with wikipedia rules thanks to which the quality of articles is high and I want to follow that This is why I prepared it took a lot of my time believe me a detailed info proving notability and the fact that I mostly use secondary sources It s available here Wikipedia Articles for deletion SORCER Unfortunately till now from those who have doubts on notability and sources there was no single comment showing directly what in their opinion is not enough within presented proves So as I appreciate our way of communication I would like to ask you for your opinion about the proves of notability and sourcing which I have provided here Wikipedia Articles for deletion SORCER I encourage you to read all of it but if you would like to focus on proves only they are listed with following dates signatures Pawelpacewicz talk Pawelpacewicz talk Additionally in Wikipedia Articles for deletion SORCER you can find opinions of 2 members who are specializing in computing User Scope creep who is member of WikiProject Computer science He reviewed one of sources and confirmed it s secondary source User W Nowicki who is member of WikiProject Computing gave keep vote I hope You find them useful