Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agent Extensibility Protocol (2nd nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 keep‎. This has been open for 17 days, and it is clear that it is not going to result in a consensus to delete, so there's no point whatever in keeping it open. Just looking at this page it would be a "no consensus" close, but under the circumstances this is more like an attempt to reopen the previous discussion than like a new discussion, and leaving "no consensus" as the outcome of the latest discussion would give a misleading impression, since the overall situation is that there is a consensus to keep. JBW (talk) 16:50, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agent Extensibility Protocol

edit
AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Agent Extensibility Protocol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is supported entirely by primary source research articles with very few to no citations. Several of the sources are only passing mentions, and none of them are in reliable venues in computer networking (e.g., NSDI or SIGCOMM). Therefore, the article fails WP:GNG.

I raised some concerns at the the previous deletion discussion but those voting to keep did not reply, so I did a more more in-depth analysis of the sources which I will include below.

  • Zheng, Dawei (30 December 2015), Control, Mechatronics and Automation Technology, CRC Press, p. 123, ISBN 978-1-315-75215-0

Passing mention, primary, not SIGCOV. This is incorrectly cited. The correct citation is: Hu, Shu, and Jia Liu. "Design and implementation of a cross-platform and cross-method SNMP extension MIB system." Control, Mechatronics and Automation Technology: Proceedings of the International Conference on Control, Mechatronics and Automation Technology (ICCMAT 2014), July 24-25, 2014, Beijing, China. CRC Press, 2015. This is an esoteric research article with a total of 0 citations.

Passing mention, primary, not SIGCOV. The correct citation is: Kim, Taehyoun, et al. "Virtual-IP zone algorithm in IP micro mobility environments." International Conference on Advances in Information Systems. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2004. It has a total of 0 citations.

Also incorrectly cited: The correct citation is: Cuadra-Sanchez, Antonio, and Clara Casas-Caballero. "End-to-end quality of service monitoring in convergent iptv platforms." 2009 Third International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies. IEEE, 2009. The article does not appear to mention the "Agent Extensibility Protocol."

Also incorrectly cited: the correct citation is: Pacheco, Vinícius, and Ricardo Puttini. "An administration structure for the OLSR protocol." International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007. This article has 7 citations on Google scholar.

Also incorrectly cited: The correct citation is: Komorowski, Michał. "Configuration management of mobile agents based on snmp." International Conference on Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. The article has 1 total citation and it is a passing mention.

Summary: The sources used to support the article are mostly esoteric, relatively uncited or not cited research articles, mostly primary sources. Several of them include only passing mentions of the subject. The articles are published in various conference proceedings, none of them in top conferences in networking or artificial intelligence. It is not clear if any of the articles is independent of the subject.

Thank you, Caleb Stanford (talk) 00:30, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Caleb Stanford (talk) 00:30, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - based on Caleb Stanford‘s detailed source analysis. Well done. —A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 01:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I see several issues with the noms analysis that will be helpful to clarify. Of the three types of concerns raised – (a) incorrect citation formats or links, (b) Primary/secondary sourcing and significant coverage, and (c) reliability of the sources; (b) and (c) are the main AfD concerns as first can be easily corrected by any editor. Overall, for (b) several sources have been labeled as "primary," but I am not sure how that assessment was made — were those books/publications written by AgentX authors or the same working group? Per WP:PRIMARY, Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved. and that doesn't seem to apply to these. Source comments below (based on which my current recommendation is based on):
    • Ref 1 – ref correction is valid. Unsure how it's primary, and appears more than trivial mention. For reliability, a broader consensus or discussion might be needed.
    • Refs 2 and 3 – they actually appear to refer to the same conference submission available here Choi, YH., Kim, B., Park, J. (2004). End-to-End Quality of Service Monitoring Using ICMP and SNMP. ECUMN 2004. I would replace both with these and it does mention AgentX protocol in sufficient detail.
    • Ref 4 – ref correction is appropriate. 7 citations is not nothing, so perhaps a broader discussion might be needed re: reliability
    • Ref 5 – ref correction is appropriate; agree with passing mention.
    • Ref 6 (new, not added to the article yet) – Mauro, Douglas R.; Schmidt, Kevin James; Schmidt, Kevin J. (2001). Essential SNMP. "O'Reilly Media, Inc.". ISBN 978-0-596-00020-2. Retrieved July 16, 2025. talks about AgentX with significant detail and has been cited many times per google scholar.
    • Ref 7 (new, not added) – Subramanyan, Rajesh, Jose Miguel-Alonso, and Jose AB Fortes. "A scalable SNMP-based distributed monitoring system for heterogeneous network computing." SC'00: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM/IEEE Conference on Supercomputing. IEEE, 2000. has been cited 75 times per GS and has a paragraph about AgentX.
    • — WeWake (talk) 05:56, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @WeWake: thanks for digging up these additional sources. Some comments
ECUMN is not a great conference in computer networking. It's a ranking of C according to conferenceranks and ICORE.
My understanding from WP:SCHOLARSHIP is that original research published in research articles is primary. This does vary, for example, if there is a review article or a textbook, that would be classified as secondary.
The biggest issue with Refs 1-5 is that they are not in reliable venues in computer networking. RSCTC and ICCSA are also rated as C, I did not find the others (International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications and International Conference on Advances in Information Systems) in ICORE.
Refs. 6 and 7: Nice find on these. SC and O'Reilly are good sources, and these look secondary and reliable. I would classify Ref. 7 as still a passing mention (all the article says is it "provides a method to distribute MIB variables among subagents, thus distributing agent's tasks"). Nevertheless, it's better than what we have. If the article passes AfD I would say we should go ahead and add 6-7 to incorporate in the article and remove most or all of 1-5. Thanks, Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I looked for sources in NSDI and SIGCOMM which might mention Agent Extensibility Protocol or AgentX. I found this source in SIGCOMM 2003, but it's only a passing mention.
Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the primary/secondary distinction is mostly a red herring here. WP:PRIMARYINPART is a useful essay, clarifying that whether a source is primary or secondary is contextual. WP:GNG tell us that these sources need to be secondary for the topic on which we cite them. For a peer-reviewed paper (conference or journal), the four qualities I look for are independence (none of the authors have an obvious COI, such as being on the relevant standards working committee), reliability (is it a reasonable publisher, are there obvious problems with the prose, etc.), sigcov (is it more than just a brief mention), and analysis (is it summarizing, describing, or synthesizing the information I want to cite [versus presenting novel data]). In the case of ref 7, it checks all of the boxes except WP:SIGCOV. If the authors contrasted their approach with AgentX in a few more sentences, I would "count" it toward meeting WP:GNG. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 19:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Suriname0: this clarifies and that was in line with my understanding! Ref. 6 appears to be the best source at present with a longer (several paragraph) description of AgentX, though it describes it as a work-in-progress (I guess this was as of 2001). Caleb Stanford (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Given an AfD was proposed and closed with keep less than a month ago and given further comments here in this thread already that suggest significant improvements can be made, per WP:RENOM I believe that it should be speedy closed. Note that this doesn't rule out future nominations. WeWake (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Agent_Extensibility_Protocol_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1303547638"