Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeus Web Server

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 of the debate was no consensus - Liberatore(T) 19:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zeus Web Server

• Delete. Already mentioned in Web server, the article has no additional content. Not notable enough (WP:N) to warrant a separate article. Claims of performance are also not vefiriable (WP:V) because publishing of benchmark results are forbidden by the license. It is just a vanity/advertisement piece. (Boborok 16:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC))
• Keep. Seems notable enough, 71,300 Google hits. SCHZMO ✍ 19:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. -- P199 20:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The claims *are* verifiable, and stop talking about publishing of results being forbidden by license - if this was true, why are there so many (very high) SPEC web scores out there using ZWS? Incidentally, look at the Sun hardware used for their Specweb test - *8* cores against *2* in ZWS tests! Hardly a conclusive test..

If we delete this article, then we delete Netscape Enterprise, Sun One, Apache, IIS, Lighttpd, etc etc. --Toph3r 22:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment I got this same message in an email to me, making this threat. Way to build consensus.Dominick ^(TALK) 00:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep for notability. Zeus Web Server is the 4th most commonly deployed web server on the Internet according to Netcraft [1]. Zeus Web Server has been featured in print magazines such as Network Computing [2] and InformationWeek [3] — Elving 03:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Elving. You saved me some minutes of search through Netcraft feeds. The article should be expanded, though. -- ReyBrujo 17:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: My motive was to encourage adding information about Zeus to the Web server article rather than this small article which is out of view. As it is now, it likely doesn't tell readers anything they didn't know yet. However knowing about ZWS can be useful for people looking for web servers generally. If there is anything more that can be said about Zeus then yes, it might require a separate article. But not until then. (Boborok 07:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC))
• Redirect to Zeus Technology, doesn't deserve its own article from what I can see. Stifle (talk) 12:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Zeus Technology, per above. --MaNeMeBasat 10:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

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.