Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SQLDetective


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:26, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

SQLDetective

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence this product is sufficiently notable for an article. The article doesn't cite any sources other than the vendor's own web site. I searched for reliable sources (Google News, Google Books, Google Scholar), the only thing I could find was a passing mention: Maybe that is enough for this to be briefly mentioned in an existing article, but it doesn't seem to be enough coverage to justify an independent article on this product. SJK (talk) 09:26, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SJK (talk) 09:35, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The article is just a cut-n-paste of a data sheet, not even in English prose. Clearly the company would need to be notable as a whole (together with all the "products") before each product is spun off. Searches do not find much mention - it might just be two kids and a web site? W Nowicki (talk) 20:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. A search turned up download sites but no significant WP:RS coverage. Article was created by an SPA who has added info on several Conquest Software Solutions products, so likely promotional.Dialectric (talk) 14:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

SQLDetective is a development and administration tool for Oracle databases. It's used by many developers and DBAs around the world. This article provides a brief description about its features for prospects and users. BTW: PL/SQL Developer you mentioned above has the similar article but it's not nominated for deletion. Please explain. Scott tiger 2002 (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * For Wikipedia, the number of users doesn't matter, it is substantial coverage in reliable sources that counts. Is this software discussed (not just once, but multiple times and in detail) in the trade press (whether online or offline), in academic papers, in books published by respected publishers, etc. This software doesn't seem to meet that standard, since searching for those sorts of sources only found the brief mention I gave above. As far as PL/SQL Developer goes, that is an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument – if you think the subject of that article doesn't meet the notability criteria, then the answer is to nominate that article for deletion, not to refrain from deleting this one. I think that article is at the very least borderline, and could be a candidate for deletion, although on the other hand I find significantly more Google Books mentions of that product than of this one, so it may be that that other article (even if only just) passes the bar whereas this article fails to meet it. SJK (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2017 (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.