Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FishEye


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

FishEye

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable software, unsupported by reliable sources. Unable to locate sources as well.  TN ‑  X   - Man  16:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep (and some expansion) Notable as it already sees widespread use across a number of major open source projects ((especially from Apache & Sun). Oodles and oodles of Googlespace. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Which of those Google hits do you think establishes notability? -- Explodicle (T/C) 17:42, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Mostly this one and its many many friends (that's just one I already had open). Pick a major open source Java project, like Spring (as noted, especially those by Apache or Sun). There will be a FishEye front-end to browsing its soure code repository. Checking my commit logs today, I browsed 74 of the things across different projects, none of them even my own project, just ones I happen to be making use of. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you know of any third-party sources that discuss the subject of FishEye itself (not just use FishEye for a project), directly in detail? -- Explodicle (T/C) 18:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You questioned its notability, not the reliability of sources. I'm sure you can do some research as well as I can. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, and notability is determined by sources. The burden of proof is on you. -- Explodicle (T/C) 20:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Searching for atlassian+fisheye returns about 2,390,000 results. The application is in many ways similar to ViewVC or Trac, but based on my perception of its employment in open source Java projects, I believe it is far more popular among developers. See also
 * A fisheye installation on Codehaus with currently 228 managed projects
 * Big open source projects (some non-Java) use it for their hosting: JBoss, MySQL, OpenSymphony, Limewire, Zend
 * Atlassian_fisheye which I haven't seen until now
 * Kak (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * We need more to keep the article than Google searches and repository lists, even if you have many of them. None of those links describe the actual topic of FishEye. Please see Notability for information on the sources we require. -- Explodicle (T/C) 01:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I understand now. The link to Google hits was misleading. The initial problem for me was how to describe FishEye. I did not find any category to fit it in, so I added the page and hoped others would add their thoughts. As you can see from my links above, the application is widely employed and used. This and the fact that fisheye is a lens in photography makes it very difficult to find coverage on the application. I found the following information, which should be sufficient for the notability requirement. Some of the sources reference Cenqua FishEye, Cenqua (another red link) being the original owner of FishEye before being acquired by Atlassian.
 * Concurrent Versions Systems on dmoz.org: "Fisheye delivers a unified view of your repository that provides easy navigation, powerful search, historical reporting, configurable file annotation and diff views, changeset analysis, RSS feeds, and integration with your issue tracker."
 * oscommerce.com: "Repository Browser" which is "a radical change compared to Trac and will take a few mouse clicks understanding how it works. It's fun looking at graphical representations of the amount of lines in the codebase with Fisheye"
 * TheServerSide.com: "FishEye opens up source code repository helping developers make sense of information that is not typically easy to extract, comprehend or keep updated."
 * grumpyoldprogrammer.com: "[…] a tool to monitor your source code repository and provide some in depth insight. Such as providing diffs of the files checked into your repository."
 * I believe the above sources should be sufficient, but still I have two questions: Do similar notable resources exist for Trac or ViewVC? A FishEye Wiki Page exists since last year. What about this page? In the meantime I will merge that information into the right page and provide a redirect. Kak (talk) 03:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I will add some of the items mentioned by Andy Dingley and me to the article. Kak (talk) 11:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Those sources look like they establish notability to me. Thanks! -- Explodicle (T/C) 15:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Atlassian Software Systems until we find reliable secondary sources that address the subject directly in detail. -- Explodicle (T/C) 18:40, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep due to new sources that establish notability. -- Explodicle (T/C) 15:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not redirect to Atlassian . There's a dab page at fisheye, all of which are more notable uses of the term. 70.55.203.112 (talk) 05:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Explodicle wants to redirect the FishEye page, not Fisheye (note the case of the first e) Kak (talk) 11:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Which is exactly why it should not be redirect to Atlassian. Fisheye is the appropriate destination. 07:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  21:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 04:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep seems to be the consensus, as far as I understood the conversation. Andy Dingley, Explodicle, and I expressed that the article is kept. Tnxman did not add any comments after the initial comment, and 70.55.203.112's comments only concerned the target of the redirect. Kak (talk) 00:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep the sources seem to be the ones accepted for notability in this area. DGG (talk) 01:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.