Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MetaTrader 4: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 07:04, 23 July 2019

MetaTrader 4

[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)

Reads like a product brochure. References aren't great - mostly press releases, how-to articles, and the manufacturer's website. There are indeed books and articles about it out there, but the former are mostly how-to and the latter are reviews or press releases. Doesn't seem particularly noteworthy to me -- if there were reliable sources saying it's, say, one of the top 5 most-used products of its type or something, I might be persuaded otherwise, but as-is I think it doesn't belong. creffett (talk) 22:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. creffett (talk) 22:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. creffett (talk) 22:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article might not be great, but this is clearly notable - and has tons, and I mean tons, of third party coverage. This is the most widely available software for Forex trading, and it has a programming language on top of which people code their own (or... offer to, dare I say, gullible 3rd parties) trading robots. Existence of numerous programming guides (e.g. [1]) rather clearly indicate this is notable (heck - I've never used MT4 myself, and I still know what it is). Icewhiz (talk) 06:47, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject's noteworthiness is supported by third-party publications. For example, this article laments the widespread use and near-monopoly status of MetaTrader among Forex brokers. One of the signs of this wiki article's importance is its monthly page views count. What should be done, probably, is article improvement with better sources. Enivid (talk) 13:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is very widely used trading platform for Forex traders and the dominant one in the industry, the page could do with improvements but should be kept. Sargdub (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Please keep this. If there are problems with the article, improve it. But, as the unanimous opinion of others already show, MT4 remains a major tool in Forex trading and for Wikipedia to ignore it entirely would be a very regrettable omission. David M Rowell (talk) 07:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 * '''Keep'''. The subject's noteworthiness is supported by third-party publications. For example, [https://financefeeds.com/platform-monopoly-end-metatrader-4-will-empower-important-components-fx-industry/ this article] laments the widespread use and near-monopoly status of MetaTrader among Forex brokers. One of the signs of this wiki article's importance is its monthly page views count. What should be done, probably, is article improvement with better sources. [[User:Enivid|Enivid]] ([[User talk:Enivid|talk]]) 13:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * '''Keep'''. This is very widely used trading platform for Forex traders and the dominant one in the industry, the page could do with improvements but should be kept. [[User:Sargdub|Sargdub]] ([[User talk:Sargdub|talk]]) 11:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
+* '''Keep'''.  Please keep this.  If there are problems with the article, improve it.  But, as the unanimous opinion of others already show, MT4 remains a major tool in Forex trading and for Wikipedia to ignore it entirely would be a very regrettable omission.  [[User:Dmrowell|David M Rowell]] ([[User talk:Dmrowell|talk]]) 07:03, 23 July 2019 (UTC)