Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Source BI

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Open Source BI

Little more than a collection of external links. Delete per WP:NOT. ZimZalaBim (talk) 16:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Collection of links classified by vaguely defined marketing term. WP is not Freshmeat. Pavel Vozenilek 19:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Even though I contributed to this article in the past, I always felt uneasy with it, since it offered no content, but just collection of links to various projects, most of which are not important enough to earn a place in Wikipedia to begin with. Wikiolap 20:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, linkfarm, virtually no content whatsoever. Resolute 05:42, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
• Do NOT Delete!! This content is VALUABLE and not replicated in the entry on Extract,_transform,_load (ETL). If the links in this article were replicated there, in the ETL article, then deleting this article would be OK, but not otherwise. Nearly all of the links in the ETL currently point to _proprietary_ tools, not open source tools. Please replicate the links in another article!! Paul D. Bain 15:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipeia is not a link directory. If there was content about such open source ETL tools - it definitely should've stayed (probably inside the main ETL article), but Open Source BI doesn't provide content - this is why it is nominated for deletion. Wikiolap 05:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Do NOT Delete!! WHAT IS THIS COMMENT - "most of which are not important enough to earn a place in Wikipedia to begin with" I guess it is fair to say that wikipedia started out as a tier1 enterprise application?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.161.180.173 (talk • contribs) .

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.