Wiki143:Articles for deletion/LYME (software bundle)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Delrevafd

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. Stifle (talk) 08:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

LYME (software bundle)

Template:La (delete) – (View log)

nn neologism per WP:NEO Mayalld (talk) 10:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge into Solution stack if notability can be established as a Linux, Yaws, Mnesia and Erlang combination is not that common and because the number of software combinations is near infinite. Rilak (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Not being "common" doesn't mean it's not notable. The potential combinations are indeed huge, but this particular combination is significant (there's a synergy between the layers that wouldn't be there with LYM-Java) and it's also discussed in WP:RS. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep This is obscure, but its notability comes from the fact that the layers of Yaws & Mnesia are both themselves implemented in Erlang (the other layer). This confers notability on two separate counts:
    • This is (AFAIK) the only stack that gains the efficiency advantage of all running within a single VM.
    • If you're interested in the admittedly small (but not unimportant) niche of Erlang, then it's also notable as being the Erlang way of playing catch-up with the far better-known LAMP / WAMP.
I hate the disambig names though: they're a vertical stack of distinct function-specific layers, not just a packaging bundle like a distro. For consistency though, we should keep LYME (software bundle) matching the others, certainly for the moment. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TravellingCari 20:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as insufficiently notable. No evidence this particular solution stack has been the subject of non-trivial coverage by multiple, reliable, third-party published sources. — Satori Son 17:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
  • There are a number of refs there now. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Why do you reject (as an example) the U. Uppsala report on Kreditor? Andy Dingley (talk) 14:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I've started some expansion work on the Mnesia article (previously a redir to Erlang). You may find this interesting, particularly if you're unfamiliar with the Erlang world. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak delete. The third-party references that have surfaced are little more than blogs and mailing lists posts; the only exception is a piece of courseware. Overall the references are too weak to justify a separate article. You can obviously mention it in one or more articles that detail the stack components. VG ☎ 19:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
"Courseware" is a rather derogatory term and suggests it's no more than a footnote on a course worksheet. It's actually a case study of a notable Swedish business that has adopted LYME throughout, published through a Swedish university that's prominent in the IT field. That one reference alone is a strong indication of notability, let alone the others (the erlang.org post is particularly interesting, as it's probably the birth of the term). As a topic related to web development, it's hardly surprising that their favoured forums of discussion are web logs. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - the solution stack in itself does not seem notable enough (in the sense of third party coverage) amongst the vast number of other solution stack combinations to justify an article of its own. The technical reasons given above, though valid, do not confer notability in the Wikipedia sense. The information in the article would be better merged into solution stack. CiaranG (talk) 10:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Question Are you the same "CiaranG" of this ref (Mnesia intro) on the article? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Answer Yes. CiaranG (talk) 11:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Comment The technical aspects above may not confer notability in the strictest wiki sense of multiple WP:RS, however this does't mean that the article is thus non-notable! As the article does already contain multiple references from reliable sources (including U. Uppsala, the BCS and erlang.org), then I'm puzzled to see why you think it isn't notable on that count. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
The article contains multiple references which back up the content - no problems with that. My reasoning is that, of those, only three mention the acronym LYME - one is a throwaway reply on a mailing list, another a personal blog post, and the third (U. Uppsala) merely uses the acronym in passing. That doesn't seem to satisfy the relevant guidelines to me. Although I already discounted the two Joe Armstrong references from this because they don't mention LYME, I also discounted them for (per WP:RS) not being independent of the subject. CiaranG (talk) 13:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
The core (and source of the notability) of this article isn't some acronym, it's the concept of stacking Y-M-E together for a benefit. Most of my "LYME" work has been WYME anyway (Erlang doesn't care which way), just because I had more Windows boxen to hand. As to your ref comments:
* "Throwaway" - yes, but it's also the earliest I've yet found, which establishes the chronology.
* Nortier (2 refs) was a speaker at the BCS conf, although his personal blog entries are more detailed than the conf overview. Wikipedia has a historically understandable aversion to "blogs", but that doesn't mean everything published via MovableType automatically becomes trivial and unreliable!
* U. Uppsala - It mentions the acronym too, but the real weight of this article is in the stack of those 3 products, not what they're called. Kreditor, and reputable descriptions of Kreditor, is an solid ref to a payment processor running $millions through a LYME-based product.
Andy Dingley (talk) 14:10, 2 October 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.
Retrieved from "http://debianws.lexgopc.com/wiki143/index.php?title=Wiki143:Articles_for_deletion/LYME_(software_bundle)&oldid=7323258"