Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HyperGraphDB


 * 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. Notability seemingly not established by significant coverage from reliable sources. Regards,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 17:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

HyperGraphDB

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

New software. Not finding significant independent coverage in reliable sources. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:36, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge with OpenCog, the only known user so far, which doesn't appear incredibly notable either. Creating a page on new software tagged from the get go with primary sources is WP:POINTy. Pcap ping  18:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 19:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep GPL licensed. Samboy (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * FYI, being GPL licensed doesn't satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion! —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * From Author: I'd understand if you decide to delete it. I modeled the entry after the entry on Hypertable which doesn't include any external to the project references either and I assumed that Wikipedia accepted serious software projects regardless of the number of independent publications about them. I'd like to know approx. how much independent coverage it needs? Bolerio —Preceding undated comment added 14:57, 12 January 2010 (UTC).
 * Some other mentions of HyperGraphDB: A presentation on next-generation databases http://www.slideshare.net/bscofield/the-future-of-data, a blog on databases http://www.viget.com/extend/database-taxonomy/, a listed lecture (but without published material) http://cs.ubbcluj.ro/~studia-i/2009-kept/Studia-2009-Kept-1-KCL.pdf. But yeah, this is pretty much all I could find on google. Bolerio
 * 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.