Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowbot


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Knowbot

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:NOTDICT and this term isn't used anywhere (I was wrong, it's used in academic literature, see discussion below).  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:02, 26 December 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  Delta  space 42  (talk • contribs) 14:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: 800+ hits on GScholar suggests that the term is, as a minimum, used in academic literature. Let's avoid WP:IDONTLIKEIT-type arguments. Owen&times; &#9742;  16:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The point still stands, because Wikipedia articles should begin with a good definition, but they should provide other types of information about that topic as well, this term is just not popular nowadays, I doubt that this article will grow into something bigger other than mere definition of the word. It's been here for 22 years after all.
 * Today, if you type knowbot in to the Google, you will get some random LLM bots instead of whatever this article is about.  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * As a suggestion, I would redirect it to Web crawler.  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 17:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles should contain a lot of things. But when an editor says something like, "this term isn't used anywhere", and is then shown that they made an incorrect statement, I expect them to correct their mistake, rather than double down with, "The point still stands". Doing a WP:BEFORE involves more than just plugging the term into Google search. We all take shortcuts occasionally, but an inability to admit a simple mistake makes it difficult to take someone's views seriously. Owen&times; &#9742;  19:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I admit that I shouldn't have included "this term isn't used anywhere" before doing proper research. Still won't change my opinion that it shouldn't have its own dedicated Wikipedia article. Let's see what others say.  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; thank you. Owen&times; &#9742;  19:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  20:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No strong opinions here, just a note that the article Knowbot Information Service shouldn't be left out of this conversation. A merger of the two might be a good way to turn two perma-stubs into one halfway informative article. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 06:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I like this idea, otherwise Knowbot Information Service could be deleted as well and it feels wrong to delete them just like that.  Delta  space 42 (talk • contribs) 08:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Final relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 09:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep From a cursory glance, knowbots are "intelligent software agents designed to perform specific tasks autonomously or collaboratively", while a knowbot information service "provides an interface to a variety of Internet directory services such as Whois and Finger." . By tech standards both of these terms are pretty ancient, and I can see the potential appeal of merging, but they don't seem to be related in their concept. Regarding the redirect suggestion, it's clearly not the same as a web crawler (web crawlers' main purpose is search indexing). Notability is not temporary, even if no one improves this article for a while. This nomination seems overly deletionist to me; I don't see these stubs (with the KIS article possibly being a permastub) doing any harm by keeping them around personally. Darcyisvery cute (talk) 18:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep appears in academic sources and several notable results when quote-searching it on google. though outdated, it seems to have been at one point notable, and as Darcy pointed out, WP:NTEMP


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.