Trichome

thcscience_admin
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. Randykitty (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IBM Product Test[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

IBM Product Test (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article has been unsourced since Jan 2007. Notability of topic is in question. Coin945 (talk) 05:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep, the nominator does not propose a valid WP:DEL-REASON. The nominator does not say which notability guideline this article fails to meet. SailingInABathTub (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the burden to show notability is on those who argue to keep. Not one source has been produced, there is no argument to keep. Wikiepdia has no grandfather clause, we do not keep rubbish articles from before 2010 when we started really enforcing notability guidelines now after 2020 just because no one was motivated enough to try to delete them during the 2010s.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Putting all the drama aside, my WP:BEFORE has shown several passing mentions - 1, 2. This could have been a redirect to IBM, but this defunct company is not mentioned there and seems to have been an independent organization. It's a clear WP:GNG and WP:ORG fail. Less Unless (talk) 21:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete' Most of the sources I see are to the "IBM Product Test Laboratory", not the procedure itself.--Rusf10 (talk) 21:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, sourcing is weak but may be notable due to being the origin of alpha and beta testing:
  1. Mukesh Sharma; Rajini Padmanaban (2014). "Leveraging the Wisdom of the Crowd in Software Testing". CRC Press. pp. 4–5. ISBN 9781482254495.
There are some other sources, and a rename to IBM Product Test Laboratory would probably be in order if the article was kept:
  1. "Money-Saving Device Not for Sale". Computerworld. 21 June 1976. - a newspaper article talking about an experimental power-switching device developed by the IBM Product Test Laboratory.
  2. R.A. Frey; G.J. Ratchford; B.E. Wendling (1990). "Vibration and shock testing for computers". Annual Proceedings on Reliability and Maintainability Symposium. IEEE. doi:10.1109/ARMS.1990.67975. - a paper documenting work done at the IBM Product Test Laboratory on product vibration and shock testing.
  3. The Tool & Manufacturing Engineer. American Society of Tool and Manufacturing Engineers. 1968. p. 8. - a book reporting on the development of a 'video motion sampler' at the IBM Product Test Laboratory.
SailingInABathTub (talk) 02:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete: Article is in terrible shape, bordering on unintelligible. And BEFORE searches return no reliable independent sources. As nominator points out, this article has been like this since 2007, so I'm proposing speedy delete given the shape the article is in. DocFreeman24 (talk) 04:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/IBM_Product_Test

Leave a Reply