Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jubula (Software)
- 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. If someone wants to merge this to Eclipse (software) or some other appropriate page I would be happt to userfy it for them. J04n(talk page) 11:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Jubula (Software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Open source software project with no RS to support notability. I see lots of forum discussions, but couldn't find any feature-length articles on the subject. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 10:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Article's full text: Jubula is an open source, Java-based that provides automated functional GUI testing for Java and HTML applications. No references, much less any showing of significant effects on technology, history, or culture. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- comment The article's lack of references is not a reason to delete. It's your job in this process to attempt to find material to support the article's claim of notability. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I thought you nominated this for deletion. You also indicated that you had looked for sources and hadn't found any of significance. I took your word for that, and pointed out that the article was not very informative, unreferenced (technically original research), seemed to be about a very technical tool for a subset of computer programmers, and made none of the claims to technical, historical, or cultural significance that I'd expect to see in an article about a specific product. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 03:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- comment The article's lack of references is not a reason to delete. It's your job in this process to attempt to find material to support the article's claim of notability. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment As of Indigo, Jubula is part of the Eclipse ecosystem, which is an indication of importance in the Java testing community. I found two references:
- Both of these are in depth and the authors seem independent of Jubula. Both are news sites, with the authors working for the sites, rather than as just bloggers. At this point, these two may indicate marginal notability of the topic. I am on the fence, hence no vote yet. --Mark viking (talk) 22:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Then it should have a section in the Eclipse article. It is not likely independently notable, much like EPIC - Eclipse Perl Integration, which has no article and has been written about quite extensively for the past decade, and the dozens of other tools that are part of the Eclipse project. Notability is not conferred on a subject because another subject incorporates it. Other notable subjects writing about makes it notable. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:10, 19 February 2013 (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.