Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virtuoso Universal Server (relist)

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 discussion was - with opinion split down the middle and arguments to notability largely unaddressed as to why they are insufficient, no consensus. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 00:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] OpenLinkVirtuoso now named Virtuoso Universal Server

Advertisement for a product created by its author, KingsleyIdehen (talk • contribs). Almost an exact copy of Virtuoso Universal Server which is also nominated for deletion. waffle iron ^talk 18:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete advertisement, nn product. Tychocat 21:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - Should we place the criteria for notability in RDBMS at OracleOracle and Informix? No, certainly not! Wikipedia has a huge hole in coverage on companies and their products. Even major companies, with tens of thousands of employes, are often missing. If the company was merged or went out of business more than five years ago, it certainly will not have an article. We cannot set the limit on notability on the few existing artiles, but must aim for far wider coverage. -- Petri Krohn 00:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment So, advertisements about anything are fine by you? I might guess that "aiming for far wider coverage" does have its limits, and a line would have to be drawn somewhere. Tychocat 01:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment If you feel the text reads like an advertisment, it is critisism of the present form of the article (and should be improved). It has however no bearing on the notability of the subject (the issue under discussion here). Major open source software projects are, in my mind, notable. -- Petri Krohn 12:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment If I believe the text reads like an advertisement, it is a reason for deletion under WP:NOT. You are correct it has nothing to do with notability, but then, I also believe the product is not notable - another reason for deletion. Major open source software projects would be notable, but no such documented claims are given here. Tychocat 10:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, or merge with Virtuoso Universal Server -- Petri Krohn 12:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Let me get this straight: Virtuoso Universal Server is nominated for deletion. Less than 24 hours later this article is created (by the author of the product in question) with nearly identical content under a different name? And then Petri Krohn (talk • contribs), who voted keep above, redirects the Virtuoso Universal Server article to this article while both AfDs are still open?!? Have I got all that right? My suggestion: Delete this page; it looks to me like an attempt to interfere with the VUS AfD. Let the VUS article survive or fail on its own merits. If OpenLinkVirtuoso is, in fact, the correct name — to judge by the web site, it isn't, though — then the VUS article can be moved to this name if it survives AfD. --Craig Stuntz 16:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment - I assume good faith. The duplicate articles seem to me like and attempted page move by an inexperienced editor/self-promoter. The AfD process cannot be a ban on improving the articles. On the contrary, it should encourage people to do their best to save the articles. Copy-paste duplication is the worst fault of this article, and it needs immediate attention.

As to the author, Kingsley Idehen. Google claims to get about 94,600 hits for "Kingsley Idehen". (About ten times as many as my name.) In reality there are 187 "most relevant results". Most of these are in respected web and paper publications. I do not think this guy needs any self-promotion on Wikipedia. He is notable by himself. I believe the same can be said about the software product. -- Petri Krohn 22:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment continues... No, I did not come here to promotote some odd piece of software. - (I usually stay away from subjects I have experice on.) - I came across these articles, because my morning paper Helsingin Sanomat writes that Mr. Tapani Erling has just been elected chairman of the Council of the World Customs Organization (a non-notable intergovernmental organization with only 168 member states). It just so happens, that Tapani Erling is the father of Orri Erling, the program manager for Virtuoso at OpenLink Software. I wrote a stub article on Tapani, but was surprised to see that Orri's equally notable work was getting such a beating in Wikipedia. -- Petri Krohn 23:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I never asserted that you tried to promote the software. I don't happen to think it's true, although I don't think your redirect was appropriate for an article in AfD. So I am wondering why you redirected the article yet again. Please don't remove AfD notices while they are open. Please note that redirecting the article is effectively removing the AfD. I have no issue with the mergeto, however. --Craig Stuntz 00:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Whoops, no scratch that. I didn't notice that you also removed all of the article content. Again, not appropriate for an article up for AfD. --Craig Stuntz 00:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Leaving the boilerplate and placing the #redirect after the text should create a "soft" redirect. The user will see the warning and have the option of following the links. I think I also tested this functionality and found it working. Evidently you did not, before reverting. -- Petri Krohn 00:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Wrong. I reverted because you blanked the article while the AfD was open. That's the only revert I did. Please check your facts before making presumptions. --Craig Stuntz 12:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. All this is very confusing with the moves, redirects, blankings, and so forth. I just closed the article on Virtuso Universal Server as a DELETE (discussion here based on the consensus at that AfD. This AfD has not reached a consensus and ought to be relisted. However, if the content of this article is to be retained, it looks like it should go under an article named "Virtuso Universal Server" rather than this article name (OpenLinkVirtuoso), as that appears to be the correct name... so I will now move both the article to that (just-deleted) name, as well as this AfD, and relist this AfD, hoping that that makes the most sense. Herostratus 16:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Virtuoso Universal Server formerly OpenLinkVirtuoso

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Herostratus 16:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. To clarify - OpenLinkVirtuoso has now been moved to Virtuoso Universal Server, so this AfD is now actually an AfD on the article named Virtuoso Unviersal Server. The previous article named Virtuoso Universal Server has just recently been deleted per consensus at that AfD. It's claimed above that the content of thetwo articles was very similar, for what that is worth. The whole thing looks a ploy to prevent Virtuoso Universal Server (or at any rate the material in the article) from being deleted at its AfD, so in a way this could be seen as a re-creation of a deleted article, but it's not as clear-cut as that, since the article OpenLinkVirtuoso was created before (the original) Virtuoso Universal Server article was deleted. Ploy or no, I don't see that convincing arguments have been made at either AfD, so I think we should look at it again and that the article should stand or fall on its merits. Herostratus 17:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• To be precise, OpenLinkVirtuoso was created after Virtuoso Universal Server was AfDed but before that AfD was closed. --Craig Stuntz 18:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: I've come to have a look and form an opinion. I think matching the article name with the new heading above may help clarify the situation. Stephen B Streater 18:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • OK. Hope I did it correctly. Herostratus 18:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete -- non-notable/not-significant software, per proposed guideline WP:SOFTWARE.--Leflyman^Talk 18:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: my initial comments were based on the limited number of entries (just 200) when Googling "OpenLinkVirtuoso" -- this appears to be a mis-titling, as "OpenLink Virtuoso" (with a space) produces over 33,000 entries (subtracting out "Wikipedia"). Thus, I am changing to a tentative keep, with a rewrite pointing to verifiable, recent sources for the content, rather than a single press release[1] and a three year old article [2]. I'd like to see the article explain who's using the software; what have reviewers actually said are its benefits, innovations or advances over comparable packages? Right now, it's just promotional. --Leflyman^Talk 00:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep: Network World seems to have a reasonable review, and it says: This is an enormous product and implies a serious commitment on the part of adopters due to its scope and range of services. The interview podcast refers to two previous stories in InfoWorld here (Virtuoso packs more technology into one product than seems possible.) and here (I can't think of another product that supports as many data pathways — or does so as intelligently — as Virtuoso). These articles, by two different people in two different publications, seem quite in-depth, particularly the last two. So it would appear to meet WP:SOFTWARE criteria 1 and 2. Whether the article needs a cleanup is another issue, which I'll look into later. Stephen B Streater 18:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment You might also include criteria 6 (The software has won an independent award or honor, including mention as one of the top ten applications in its class in an independent published list.), as Kingsley Idehen was nominated a 2003 InfoWorld Innovator for "his scientific instincts to build Virtuoso, a wildly innovative virtual database...". (Or should this only be counted forward the creators notability?) -- Petri Krohn 23:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I struck out my delete vote in the original discussion because that vote was based on the duplicate article and the blanking, which appeared to me to be interfering with the AfD. Hopefully that won't happen the second time around and with only one article. No vote from me just yet. --Craig Stuntz 20:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as advertising. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - I have expanded the article and made it less like simple promotional material. The product itself is notewothy. -- Petri Krohn 07:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • How, exactly, is it noteworthy? Could you cite some sources, please? Something more substantial than "packs more technology into one product than seems possible." Dpbsmith (talk) 11:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • What sort of things are you looking for? We have some significant independent press coverage already, as well as loads of Google hits. Stephen B Streater 14:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • softwaremag.com list OpenLink Software, Inc in their Software 500 list of the largest software companies globally [3]. (I did not register, so I did not see the actual figures for 2005.) According to 2002 figures available here OpenLink Software was number 476 with sales of $4.0 and 64 employees. I think being listed in a global list of top 500 makes a company and their main product notable. -- Petri Krohn 09:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment An other claim to notability is related to Wikipedia itself. Wikipedia runs on top a MySQL database. MySQL is usually regarded a Swedish project, but in fact it has its roots in Finland, with both the founder and the current CEO being Finns. With the new section on "History" the article now provides a "noteworthy insight into the history database technology development in Finland." The Kubl RDBMS (now called Virtuoso) was in fact one of a large set of Finnish database start-ups, several of them still playing a major role in the global RDBMS market. This concentration of database developement in the home town of Linus Torvalds and Nokia can be no coincidence. -- Petri Krohn 07:04, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment That is a tenious connection at best. That seems like some sort of original research. --waffle iron ^talk 23:52, 12 July 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.