Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IBM Tivoli Storage Manager

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Approaching WP:SNOW territory, although the desirability of improvement, to the extent possible, is noted. BD2412 T 01:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IBM Tivoli Storage Manager

[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)

Not notable. There are no independent sources Jcarlosmartins (talk) 15:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is your / the criteria for notability? There are plenty of software products documented in Wikipedia that have limited audience. This is one of the largest enterprise backup products in use, and if you're considering deleting its page, you should consider deleting every other product on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_backup_software . As per Wikipedia guidelines, an article needing improvement is not a valid reason for deletion. IBM recently deleted a large amount of their own web structure, which impacts sourcing somewhat.

Xaminmo (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can read about Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:List of guidelines. I will try to remove other non-notable articles in this category. Please, be aware that Wikipedia is based on Wikipedia:Reliable sources so IBM is not an independent source. If you find some independent sources, please add them to prevent deleting this article. --Jcarlosmartins (talk) 09:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this article seems to be not notable due to the lack of independent sources, and should be deleted. The fact that other software-related articles may also lack independent sources doesn't make this article notable.PopePompus (talk) 07:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (disclaimer; this is a product I am familiar with. I believe I applied the same standard to it as to other things I have voted on recently) A google book search returns a plethora of hits, most of which are primary, but there are also independent hits like this one. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Implementing_Backup_and_Recovery/_DqO6kizEDUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22IBM%20Tivoli%20Storage%20Manager%22%20-wikipedia there are also several review found in Google News, I did not go through them all, but to me it looks like a notable product.
Keep Notable to be sure in its field, and a very possible search term for WP readers - this product should have an encyclopedia article here.--Concertmusic (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:23, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge into other articles on IBM products, at least the history of the product is obviously of encyclopedic interest. The product's current instantiation may not be very interesting to us as an encyclopedia (although potential additional sources are mentioned above). jp×g 06:13, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep and improve. The article has several problems, for sure, but the product is 'real-life notable', that's just not currently borne out by the very weak references. A lot of work to be done, but worth trying to salvage IMO. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are entire books written about this subject. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.