Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MyEclipse (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Nomination seems to stem from the unreasonable criteria that in order to be notable something must standout from its peers or be unique. Something can be plain, ordinary and even boring and still be notable. Many sources were listed in the AfD, and there was sufficient 'keep' participation to demonstrate that the article will undoubtedly be improved. JERRY talk contribs 03:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

MyEclipse
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete this is the second go-round for this Java tool set; it was kept last Sept. with a rewrite. Following what rewrite occurred it still lacks significant coverage in independent 3rd party reliable sources to demonstrate that it's notable. There are lots of Java packages out there and this one doesn't seem to rise out of the pack in any notable fashion. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC) #1 rated Eclipse Plugin on EPIC SDTimes AjaxWorld Magazine CRN InfoWorld eWeek InfoQ Evans Data Corp - top IDE listings Java Developers' Journal Application Development Trends JAX Magazine Jense (talk) 03:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC) Infoworld product review ZDNet - Ed Burnett RedMonk Analyst Firm - James Governor Java Developers' Journal SDTimes Jense (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2008 (UTC) 
 * Consider merging with Genuitec. Pburka (talk) 00:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Some notable third-party references/coverage:
 * Comment. Those all look like press releases. Pburka (talk) 04:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I would say most are not. It seems like product release coverage. Additionally, came across these:
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  19:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. I'd have to agree that most of the coverage is just parroting a press release. What real coverage there is seems to consist of quips from bloggers. Yet I do think it has the potential to be notable, if only for its notoriety in that community. Ultimately, though, if there is a decent article to be had from what sources exist, I'd prefer to see that article first rather than keeping the article on life support hoping that someone will work on it. Leaving it on the List of Eclipse-based software would otherwise suffice. Ham Pastrami (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not delete. I fully disagree with request to delete. This is a great product with a thriving community offered at a considerable discount over the nearest competition.  It is hard to go anywhere today without running into press coverage or a Blog about how someone discovered sanity while using it.  Here is a partial list of what I could find when sorting through the over half a million Google listing on this name

http://agile.csc.ncsu.edu/SEMaterials/tutorials/seq_diagram_me/ http://www.oreillynet.com/onjava/blog/2005/09/myeclipse_tips.html http://sureshkrishna.wordpress.com/2007/10/23/myeclipse-is-cool/ http://codethought.com/blog/?p=65 http://www.hrum.org/people/debedb/pro/articles/myeclipse-j2ee-blueprints.html http://www.informit.com/guides/content.aspx?g=java&seqNum=291 Samwan2b (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not delete. I also disagree with request to delete. Wikipedia is full of Java IDE's and most are much less noteworthy than MyEclipse.  Oh, and if you want to see one really written like an advertisement have a look at JDeveloper from Oracle .  Now that is an advertisement. :-)  Anyway, MyEclipse is much more widely known and used than most products listed and not quite so popular as others.  Seems perfectly fine to me upon review of these additional links and other similar product pages. --Javawonk (talk) 17:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. Last two entries are by SPAs with no prior history; I believe they are sockpuppets. Ham Pastrami (talk) 13:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. Actually, it's just the first time I've stumbled over something in Wikipedia that I both found inaccurate and also have the background and expertise to comment on somewhat authoritatively. Ham Pastrami, from your prior comment you seem to sincerely just want a good article on the topic if one can be had.  I agree.  Perhaps if you gave Jense a few pointers to similar articles you do deem appropriate he could work on this article to both enhance it and make it conform to those guidelines.  For example, should it read like the JDeveloper article I referenced in my last post ?  Perhaps it should be like this one on IBM's RAD product ?  Do you have any constructive suggestions for improvement? --Javawonk (talk) 20:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Could you give us a little more detail about what is meant by having the "background and expertise" on this subject? Please note that the debate is about whether the product is notable, which doesn't really require expertise, it requires objective, published sources. In other words, if you are telling us that solid, third-party sources exist, just show us; if not, it ultimately doesn't matter that or how you are an expert. The reason I haven't provided sources of my own is because I can't find any that would be considered reliable and significant coverage, which is the point. Neither of the other Java IDE articles you mention are examples of ideal writing, but that is not the discussion we are having here -- you can nominate them for deletion as well if you feel that is the proper course to take, noting WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. As it stands, User:Jense has an edit history showing only edits to MyEclipse-related articles, along with two new users are the only people who are voting to keep. If anything, this is making me more inclined to delete. Ham Pastrami (talk) 09:35, 23 February 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.