[WikiEN-l] More AfD toxicity

[Justin Cormack]

On 15 Feb 2006, at 16:07, Steve Bennett wrote:
> I know very little about DMExpress - hence the stubbiness :) Here's  
> my scenario:
> I work in the domain of ETL.
> Someone mentions DMExpress. I have no idea what it is.
> I head to Wikipedia, my first resource when I want to know what  
> *anything* is.
> No article.
>
> Should there not be an article? There aren't that many ETL tools. Your
> analogy is a bit flawed: You're saying that the artist is notable, but
> his paintings aren't. The equivalent then would be something like that
> the company is notable, but that individual copies of their products
> aren't. Really, though, in many cases, the company is not notable,
> their product isn't notable, and obviously individual instances of
> their products are not.
>
> To resolve the question of whether my example of a stub was above or
> below the minimum quality waterline (just as an example, delete it for
> all I care :)), we do need to agree whether DMExpress is notable or
> not. A brief search shows 800 google results including magazine
> articles, so I'm not sure what the "no" argument would be.

I dont know if there should be one. I cant tell from the stub, thats
the problem. The company might be notable (I think that WP:CORP is
a bit restrictive, and should be ignored in many cases). But individual
software products are often not very notable (if I write the history
of software if wont include much about programs that import and export
data). But it of course may be very important; just neither of us know.

I would rather have a good article about ETL including a list of  
products
(that could be redirects) than a bunch of stubs that may never be  
filled in.

Justinc