Content deleted Content added
→Notability again: new section |
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "List" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Software}}. Tag: |
||
| (43 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Old AfD multi | date = 4 September 2007 (UTC) | result = '''delete''' | page = List of GUI testing tools | date2 = 17 May 2016 | result2 = '''keep''' | page2 = List of GUI testing tools (3rd nomination)}}
{{oldafdfull| date = 2 August 2014 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = List of GUI testing tools (2nd nomination)}}
{{WikiProject Software|importance=low|computing-importance=low}}
}}
{{tmbox
| type = content
| text = This article is [[WP:LINKFARM|not a linkfarm]]. Before adding products to the list, make sure they are [[WP:
}}
▲{{WikiProject Computing|class=List|importance=low}}
==Junit==
I don't think JUnit really belongs in this list. Regards, [[User talk:BenAveling|Ben Aveling]] 03:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Line 306 ⟶ 309:
--></nowiki>
: The discussion here has been unanimous, however, if you want to approach a new consensus, this is where the discussion should happen not on my talk page. Don't try to change it by edit warring either. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 04:10, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
:: Thank you for trying to make this article less useful by deleting references to GUI testing tools. It is a shame that small wikipedia contributions like adding a tool to this list is simply deleted rather than you leaving it so that someone else could improve it by taking the minimal time to create a stub article for the tool. Your scolding tone is also unnecessary. I've never been involved in a revert war so I'm just going to leave the article alone and it will continue to be what it is: incomplete, sadly out of date and therefore useless. In my opinion, this makes Wikipedia worse, not better. [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]]) 14:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
:: I also want to note that what you call "unanimous discussion" seems to be mostly YOUR comments and edits. I think someone should review your dictatorial control of the page. I'll be asking the administrators to take a look. You seem to be unusually aggressive with this page. [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]]) 14:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
::: Less useful, that's one opinion. [[:WP:LINKFARM]] is another.
::: How would listing every product help improve Wikipedia?
::: How would listing every product help help Wikipedia contributors?
::: My actions have been supported by other editors. I simply happen to be the most active editor. I am no more aggressive with this page than I am on any page I have on my watch list.
::: And for the record, I'm not opposed to changing what lists like this contain, but trash talk and personal attacks doesn't help make the case for change. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 14:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
:::: Right, the policy you link to states the following: "External links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate. See Wikipedia:External links for some guidelines." There is nothing excessive about linking to another tool that has the same stature and notability as some of the others here. I contend that the link I added to the table was "useful" and "content-relevant." There just aren't that many GUI testing tools in the world. There is no danger of it becoming a link farm. But you just go ahead and do what you like with the page. I'm done here. [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]]) 19:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
::::: The excessive nature is when every back-yard hobbyist adds their tool regardless of notability to the list despite them thinking it's useful or content-relevant. There are many GUI Testing tools in the world, I have seen the lists elsewhere. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 04:03, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::: I have no relationship to Sikuli. Here's how it came that I added it to the list. I work for a company and we need an automated, cross-platform GUI testing tool that is also open source. There is one on your (note that I say "your" and not "Wikipedia's" list that I was interested in, but a colleague pointed me toward another tool that I had never heard of and that was Sikuli. I thought I would at least put a link to it on the page. But it seems that any arm-chair enthusiast without a higher degree in anything thinks that they know better about what should appear in a Wikipedia entry. You keep fighting the good fight. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Victorianist|contribs]]) 03:54, 2 August 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::::::: Found out about Sikuli from a colleague after I looked into this Wikipedia list and didn't find any GUI testing tools based on optical recognition. Started rolling my own but luckily found out about Sikuli on time. Wikipedia needs a "USELESS" tag/banner on top of articles like this, so you know that the list is "incomplete" because people delete e.g. entries to MIT projects from it because random, not because nobody bothered to "help expanding it". <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/189.26.125.29|189.26.125.29]] ([[User talk:189.26.125.29|talk]]) 19:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::::: And also, I think you need to seriously edit this list. Most of the entries do not have citations, there's one redline link, and some of the others have some columns marked "unknown." I'll be cleaning up the list applying your own guidelines. [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]]) 03:58, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
::::::: I'm the one who added the citation needed tags. Feel free to remove the redlinks. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 05:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
:::::::: Walter has gained a reputation as a grade A douche nozzle for his maintenance of this page. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.24.202.165|24.24.202.165]] ([[User talk:24.24.202.165#top|talk]]) 05:44, 19 November 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
::::::::: Funny. If I've done something wrong, take it to an administrator's forum. They'll listen. If you just want to troll, feel free to find another forum. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 21:25, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
== Article nominated for deletion ==
This article has been nominated for deletion before, in 2007 and the consensus at that time was that it should be deleted. The "criteria" of notability proposed in the talk page and in hidden comments in the article itself is that that each link should point to an already existing article on Wikipedia, but this does not establish notability. The list contains red links and none of the listed items points to verifiable sources or to sources that establish notability. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Victorianist|contribs]]) 04:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: And the list was recreated in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_GUI_testing_tools&oldid=185164952 2008]. It currently only lists notable subjects despite your effort to turn it into a link farm and include other items. I really don't understand your logic.
: Notability applies to subjects, I'm not sure it applies to lists. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 05:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
: Also, as I stated at the AfD page, the citation needed tags on each row are not related to whether the individual entry is or is not notable or reliably sourced simply that the attributes of each entry (testing system requirement, system under test requirement, GUI test, automation, and current version) is reliable information. It does not reflect whether the idea of such a list is or is not worthy of an article. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 12:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
::I think that you're quibbling. The articles for each tools listed here will also be proposed for deletion. Hardly any of them meet the criteria of notability or verifiability. By your criteria, a GUI tool must merely have an article, whether or not the article is a quality article. If that logic were allowed to continue, Wikipedia would contain both garbage articles and garbage indexes. I was not trying to create a link farm. I was trying to add another link. I now see that you're right. Wikipedia should be held to a higher standard. A list such as this is useless because it's not complete and the tools that it does list are here just because they have an article about them, whatever their level of notability. [[User:Victorianist|Victorianist]] ([[User talk:Victorianist|talk]]) 16:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
::: That's an interesting take. Let's let the AfD decide. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 16:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
== Sikuli / SikuliX ==
I'm trying to get Sikuli in the list. I tried to add an article so it wouldn't be rejected here, but I noticed lots of people are having trouble getting an article created due to Wiki's "notability" policy. Sikuli's a pretty significant tool to be missing from the list, notwithstanding all this pedantic procedural stuff. I've consulted at a number of Fortune 100 companies, and lots of them are using it. --[[User:Jrounceville|Jrounceville]] ([[User talk:Jrounceville|talk]]) 22:28, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
: It's been added as an article, three times, but deleted due to lack of notability. The most recent discussion, [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sikuli]], was July 2014. Based on what I'm seeing online, it still fails [[:WP:GNG]] or any of the [[:WP:N|notability]] guidelines. WHile Fortune 100 companies may be using it, it's not use that determines notability, but people writing about it. It's not that they're using it, but how as well. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 01:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
: I just did a cursory examination and I'd also have a hard time saying that I can find enough for it to be notable. If you have some sources then please share them. [[User:AliveFreeHappy|AliveFreeHappy]] ([[User talk:AliveFreeHappy|talk]]) 19:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
== Contested deletion ==
This article should not be speedy deleted as having no substantive content, because... it is useful <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.194.230.26|66.194.230.26]] ([[User talk:66.194.230.26|talk]]) 20:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Agreed, this article is useful. Thanks! <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/192.35.35.40|192.35.35.40]] ([[User talk:192.35.35.40#top|talk]]) 13:50, 29 January 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== GUI Testing Tools or General Testing Tools? ==
I came here because I have been doing research for my company on tools like these, but there are several tools on here now that are either only loosely related to GUIs, or not related at all. For example Ascentialtest is one. It is a regression testing tool as far as I can see, which has nothing to do with GUIs. There is also several web testing tools, where while web pages are GUIs, perhaps they should have their own category and list with a link to it at the bottom of this. e.g. "If you're looking for web testing tools, there is a list here:" After all, if you are looking for general GUI testing tools, a Web testing tool just doesn't cut it.
Just some feedback from me. I just had to make an account now, so I'll leave it to someone else in case people think I just came in here to troll. [[User:ChthonicOne|ChthonicOne]] ([[User talk:ChthonicOne|talk]]) 19:15, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
== BrowserStack ==
Would [[BrowserStack]] be valid? [[User:Richardc020|Richardc020]] ([[User talk:Richardc020|talk]]) 16:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
: As a GUI testing tool? It tests websites, but not desktop GUIs, so no. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 03:38, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
: Although you could argue it being listed here, I'd have to agree with Walter. As far as I know, that would be more valid if the topic was for "websites" in general rather than "Web UI". [[User:Joedf|Joedf]] ([[User talk:Joedf|talk]]) 13:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
== Tools to be added ==
Playwright and Cypress. [[Special:Contributions/41.116.30.233|41.116.30.233]] ([[User talk:41.116.30.233|talk]]) 19:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
| |||