User talk:Fxrs90

Proposed deletion of Visual Expert


The article Visual Expert has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "add-on for Power Builder--no evidence of separate notability"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  DGG ( talk ) 04:08, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Why Visual Expert needs a separate article and not a section in the PowerBuilder Page
Please note that Visual Expert is used in conjunction with several programming languages: Oracle PL/SQL, SQL Server Transact-SQL, PowerBuilder - Microsoft .NET and other languages announced already.

In most cases, it is analyzing several languages at the same time: front-end + back-end + dependencies between them for instance. So it cannot fit in the page of a single programming language, PowerBuilder or other. Duplicating and maintaining a Visual Expert section for each technology supported is not practicle.

For this reason, you can find in List_of_tools_for_static_code_analysis a very long list of Code Analysis tools like Visual Expert, that also support various programming languages. Most of these tools have their own page.

Also, for comparison pages like Comparison_of_documentation_generators, comparison tables include references to each tool. It is more convenient for the reader to find a dedicated page for each compared tool, with all the related information, no matter the technologies this reader may be interested in. If we would include a Visual Expert section in multiple pages - one per technology - we would need to include multiple references in each comparison table, which is not feasible...

Thanks Fxrs90 (talk) 09:57, 7 September 2017 (UTC)