Deletion of GLPI

Comment: This product may be useful, it may be free, but that has no impact on its notability. And as it stands now, with only one http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Gestionnaire+libre+de+parc+informatique%22&hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1T4TSNA_enUS385US385&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=0mrVTLuwJYGclgfK1fn8CA&ved=0CA8QpwU trivial source (and a |non-english one at that), it doesn't meet guidelines for notability. The same is true on a http://www.google.fr/search?hl=fr&q=%22Gestionnaire+libre+de+parc+informatique%22&sa=N&tbs=nws:1,ar:1 French news search, only one result
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:NOENG)

Comment: Utterly fails  and  … just another |NN web-based database. Happy Editing! &mdash; '''{{User|70.21.16.94
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WEB||WP:GNG||WP:N)

Comment: I beg to differ, but the ''only'' "references" are |self-published sources from the subject's own website, glpi-project.org … please find and add some ''independent''  citations. &mdash; Special:Contributions/70.21.16.94|70.21.16.94
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:SPS||WP:RS)

Comment: If it's so "popular", then how come no one can find any |reliable sources that talk about it? Links to the subject's own website do absolutely ''nothing'' to establish |Notability by Wikipedia standards. &mdash; Special:Contributions/70.21.16.94|70.21.16.94
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N)