Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AgileJ StructureViews: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
lacks sources
Line 13: Line 13:


*'''Delete''' – The sources are brief and seem to be based on press releases. Former versions of the article had cites to a couple of blog posts by users who tried it out, but can't find any coverage in reliable 3rd-party sources. – [[User:Margin1522|Margin1522]] ([[User talk:Margin1522|talk]]) 21:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' – The sources are brief and seem to be based on press releases. Former versions of the article had cites to a couple of blog posts by users who tried it out, but can't find any coverage in reliable 3rd-party sources. – [[User:Margin1522|Margin1522]] ([[User talk:Margin1522|talk]]) 21:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - It's worth noting that it's rare for such tools to be covered in the media (though this doesn't exempt it). Any sources would likely be only in journals. [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22AgileJ+StructureViews%22] indicates it being mentioned in a few papers (14), all of which have few if any citations, so it does not seem that this is a widely used software. It's also not the only one of its kind. Other eclipse plugins with similar functionality include [http://www.objectaid.com/] [http://www.architexa.com/]. To compare it to other Java tools that have wikipedia articles, [[FindBugs]] has had a much larger impact, with [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&as_epq=findbugs&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21] nearly 2000 papers mentioning it, with more citations. &#8213;<span style="background:#8FF;border:solid 1px;border-radius:8px;box-shadow:darkgray 3px 3px 1px;font-family:Segoe Print">&nbsp;[[User:Padenton|<span style="color:#C00">Padenton</span>]]&nbsp;&#124;[[User talk:Padenton|&#9742;]]&nbsp;</span> 22:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:00, 19 March 2015

AgileJ StructureViews (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There is a lack of coverage AgileJ StructureViews in independent reliable sources. Current sourcing is a mix of PR, primary and listings. A search found nothing better. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA1000 00:37, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – The sources are brief and seem to be based on press releases. Former versions of the article had cites to a couple of blog posts by users who tried it out, but can't find any coverage in reliable 3rd-party sources. – Margin1522 (talk) 21:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - It's worth noting that it's rare for such tools to be covered in the media (though this doesn't exempt it). Any sources would likely be only in journals. [1] indicates it being mentioned in a few papers (14), all of which have few if any citations, so it does not seem that this is a widely used software. It's also not the only one of its kind. Other eclipse plugins with similar functionality include [2] [3]. To compare it to other Java tools that have wikipedia articles, FindBugs has had a much larger impact, with [4] nearly 2000 papers mentioning it, with more citations. ― Padenton |  22:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]