Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Excelsior JET

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 no consensus. WP:NPASR. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excelsior JET[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable product, fails WP:N and, yes, I did some WP:BEFORE: and 99% of the Ghits are press release type materials or regurgitations thereof. ukexpat (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What WikiPedia wants to avoid is puffery and advertising. The entry contains none of that. Everything it says are verifiable facts stated in an emotionally neutral way. I wrote an entry for Jet myself at http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jet.html. I have been using it for years. It is an extremely good product, far better than the entry lets on. As for truth, it is well above the Wiki average. Who is objecting to the WikiPedia entry and why? I suspect some sort of bias is at play -- e.g. a dislike of Russians. Have the people objecting to the entry ever used Jet and Java? If not they not really in a position to judge the entry. Roedy Green —Preceding undated comment added 17:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

delete fails WP:GNG. no in-depth coverage. LibStar (talk) 09:59, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N From a historical computer science and a history of Java perspective, this was the first integrated commercial product that allowed decompilation protection, reduced runtime size, pre-runtime and pre-target compilation to lock down the deployment, and performance enhancements equivalent to native C and C++. Equivalent articles include Java JIT, GNU Java, and Java decompilers. The historical influence is fairly far reaching particular to high level programming language design including Java, Oberon, Modula-2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbolcer (talk • contribs) 14:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Ignore all rules. Of course a java runtime and compiler won't have immediate results in Google News. However, the topic is of encyclopedic relevance, because it documents the history of computing. Northamerica1000^(talk) 10:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It appears undisputed that the required third-party coverage is lacking. Northamerica1000's argument is false because if the topic were important to the history of computing, a reliable source would have documented the software. In the absence of such sources, any assertions about historical relevance are original research. Sandstein 06:35, 23 May 2012 (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.