Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Object Data Manager


 * 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. MelanieN (talk) 00:35, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Object Data Manager

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't appear to be a notable component of the OS such that it needs to be merged with the AIX article, and as it is unsourced, I don't believe it is a merger candidate. MSJapan (talk) 05:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  09:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge to IBM AIX. Does not need to be independently notable to be included there. Does not need need to be sourced to be included there. The only concern would be WP:V. Has this material been challenged or is it likely to be challenged. Absolutely not. This is an uncontroversial topic and, as with most technical topics, is in long-term slow-motion development and should not be WP:DEMOLISHED. ~Kvng (talk) 22:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply - Well, I suppose we can ignore WP:UNSOURCED if you want, but I wouldn't; if we're going to have specific "examples of data stored", that needs to be verified, the burden of which is citation. If the claim is made that it is unique, that is a very specific/extraordinary claim and must be cited.  That interaction is performed via API is a specific claim of functionality that needs to be cited.  That users are provided with command-line utilities is a specific claim of interface, and thus needs to be cited.  Without citations, this might as well be made up, and I've just addressed almost everything in the article except the name. MSJapan (talk) 23:08, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't take WP:UNSOURCED to read on a merge. Merging is not adding. The material is already in the encyclopedia, we're just moving it. Merge first and then let editors of the target article work out any WP:V issues. ~Kvng (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Understanding the ODM is an essential part of AIX sysadmin. A simple WP:BEFORE-style search shows many RS. I added 6 sources to the article, 5 of which are secondary RS and 3 of those are books. Multiple in-depth reliable sources show the topic to be notable. A notable topic and an article with no major insurmountable problems suggests keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 04:29, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:54, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as a separate article. This is AIX's equivalent of Windows Registry. It is important to device driver writers as well as system administrators. AIX's mechanism for storing system information in this way sets it apart from other Unix systems. It was created so that new devices could be added to a system without stopping the machine and rebuilding the kernel. In my incarnation as a UNIX system programmer I endured a move from Unix to AIX. There are independent references. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think there is enough RS that mentions this to demonstrate notability as an independent article. A search for the exact phrase "AIX Object Data Manager" on Google Scholar gets 11 hits; removing "AIX" gets more hits (not all of which are about the article topic, but some probably are.) Likewise the exact phrase "AIX Object Data Manager" gets 16 results on Google Books; several of these might be discounted as being IBM RedBooks, but there is at least 5 books mentioning it which can't be dismissed in this way. (And once again, searching for "Object Data Manager" will find more hits, some of which are likely about this, but some are also about other things with the same name.) SJK (talk) 07:40, 27 June 2016 (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.