Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diagrams.net


 * 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 no consensus. Daniel (talk) 04:14, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Diagrams.net

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No indication of notability per WP:GNG or WP:NSOFTWARE. I have found no reliable, significant coverage of this tool. pinktoebeans (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  pinktoebeans  (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  pinktoebeans  (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm impressed by how small the article is. Based on how often I've seen it used, I'd have guessed it was quite popular. I agree with the proposer that apparently it's not easy to find coverage of this tool. BernardoSulzbach (talk) 18:24, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I needed basic info on draw.io and the search revealed this page which I found useful. draw.io is many years old and I also am surprised how small it is and wasn't linked from lists of drawing  software. The current project is active and impressive, uses the cloud. I'm surprised it's not notable.Petermr (talk) 11:59, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree, I've heard a lot of good things about the application and I'm sure it's very useful! I just can't find anything to back it up that satisfies WP:GNG. pinktoebeans  (talk) 13:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 12:25, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Coming across this, I am in fact surprised at how little secondary information on this tool there is out there. A quick Internet search came up mostly with information from the project itself and app stores. The only secondary information I could find was https://www.redhat.com/architect/diagramming-tools-cloud-infrastructure and https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/sysadmin-tools-diagrams; I would say these are two articles from a reputable vendor not affiliated with the project.

Apart from coverage, the project has been around for a few years (the Github repo had its first commit in October 2016; and some unverified sources mention the project has been around as early as 2013). It appears mature and well-maintained, and offers integration with a wide range of widespread (and certainly notable) platforms – Confluence/Jira, GitHub, GitLab, Notion, VS Code, Google Workspace, SharePoint/OneDrive/Office 365, Mediawiki, Nextcloud/ownCloud, as well as a desktop version for Windows, Linux and MacOS and a Google Chrome app. (Sources: https://www.diagrams.net/blog/integrations, https://www.diagrams.net/integrations).

In conclusion, I would say the product has been around for some time and appears to be used widely, which would make it notable in itself even if there is little independent literature on it (though the low number of people writing about it does puzzle me). Let us bear in mind that, as per WP:GNG “significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article”, and a deeper discussion might come to a different conclusion. The opposite case is not specifically mentioned, but I would stick with the same principle here: absence of coverage creates an assumption of insufficient notability, but an deeper discussion might come to a different conclusion.

The scarcity of independent and verifiable information does pose some challenges, though on the other hand Wikipedia’s guidelines do allow taking information from primary sources if that information is not contested or likely to be biased. That would apply to a release/version history (if taken from a public Git repo, that would even add a certain amount of verifiability), license terms, a list of features or a list of supported platforms.

Therefore, although independent information is scarce, I would consider the project sufficiently notable to be included, and believe we can get a usable article with the information available.--Michael-stanton (talk) 16:20, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.
 * Logs:
 * --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Bold third relist looking for more contributions.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 01:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC) I am really surprised, that Draw.io = Diagrams.net has no Wikipedia page and is marked for deletion. Diagrams.net is really THE BEST drawing tool compared to YED, InkScape, LucidChart, SmartDraw, Visio and a lot of other free and pay tools. I used and tested all of them intensely for various applications in engineering, block diagrams, flow charts, electrical circuits … -> I am motivated and willing to contribute for the German and English wikipedia page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwipedes (talk • contribs)


 * 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.