Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/STBox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 JERRY talk contribs 03:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] STBox
Promotion for a non-notable product. Failed {{prod}} when an anonymous user from the company (CTG) objected. Toddst1 (talk) 11:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - it appears to be the instruction book for this non-notable product. Springnuts (talk) 12:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Wikipedia is not a how-to manual. JohnCD (talk) 12:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Do not delete - It's not an instruction book or manual, it's a explanation of a test approach, just as e.g. TMap. User:Mpilaeten (talk) 14:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- I see that TMap has been deleted. Is there a specific reason to delete software methodologies? Is software as itself not notable enough? If so, you can delete all items under Methodology_(software_engineering)#Examples Mpilaeten (talk) 08:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- It comes down to WP:N and/or WP:Spam. Articles must pass this test on an individual basis. You pointed out that TMap was similar in its lack notability and potential spammyness to STBox. You were right. Toddst1 (talk) 15:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- And how would you define notability? If you follow the guidelines for notability, both articles comply: there are several independent sources, listed on both articles. I'll give another example: PRINCE2 is a methodology with little sources, but used a lot. Are you telling me that that is not notable? For STBox, I suggest putting the expert-subject tag on the page, since the idea of a methodology seems odd for some people. Mpilaeten (talk) 09:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- It comes down to WP:N and/or WP:Spam. Articles must pass this test on an individual basis. You pointed out that TMap was similar in its lack notability and potential spammyness to STBox. You were right. Toddst1 (talk) 15:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- I see that TMap has been deleted. Is there a specific reason to delete software methodologies? Is software as itself not notable enough? If so, you can delete all items under Methodology_(software_engineering)#Examples Mpilaeten (talk) 08:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: Please note that User:Mpilaeten is a WP:SPA with no other edits other than promotion of STBox.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Toddst1 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 9 January 2008
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 02:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Not notable. Erik Warmelink (talk) 04:58, 11 January 2008 (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.
