Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Habanero.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   delete. Secret account 05:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Habanero.NET

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article is unreferenced and I find no reliable sources to indicate that this is notable by our standards. Drmies (talk) 01:53, 15 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete I found many sources for a Habanero collaborative framework but could find no significant sources for Habanero.NET independent of Habanerolabs/Chillisoft. Unless I've missed something, this topic would seem to fail both general WP:GNG and software WP:NSOFTWARE notability guidelines. --Mark viking (talk) 04:59, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Another Enterprise Application Framework for the .NET platform that provides tools for rapid application development using agile techniques.  I gather this has something to do with programming computers, but the article is couched in vague, promotional buzzwords.  No showing of significant effects on technology, history, or culture. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Not Delete Habanero.net is notable for a couple of things. For one, it is listed in this Wikipedia article . for another, it is a significant resource for .NET developers of database driven applications as an open source alternative to the Primary Microsoft ORM(Object Relational Mapping) technology. I do understand the article's short comings in that the technology is mostly one by one company however it is open source so it is not a single company product. For example the technology, JAVA, is primarily a single company technology but I don't see requests for deletion of decriptions of that. I also understand the short coming of the articles use of technology specific nominclature, which was mistaken for promotional buzzwords. There could be edits of the article to use more common terms or include a glossery of nominclature. for disclosure I am a DOT NET developer and have nothing to do with and know little about the company that open sourced this technology.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hricker (talk • contribs) 18:16, 20 February 2013 (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.