Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soot (software)

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 keep. There is just enough marginal notability about that company's software that it seems like a plausible destination for redirects. — Coren ^(talk) 22:45, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soot (software)

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

Another article relating to the Sable research group, recently deleted at AfD. The only coverage appears to be from people associated with the research group. Michig (talk) 09:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=soot+jimple. I haven't taken an in-depth look at all the sources, but they appear to be both numerous and independent. A merge to Sable Research Group doesn't seem to be a possibility anymore. —Ruud 16:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the first page of those results, all the articles that provide coverage of any significance are written by people associated with the Sable research group. It's common in academia for people to publish many papers on their own work and for associated research groups to cite each others work. I think we need some real evidence of significant independent coverage here, and if anyone comes up with it I will be happy to withdraw the nomination. --Michig (talk) 17:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how many papers you have configured to display on your "first page", but for me most results on positions 10-100 seem to comes from a widely differing set of researchers form a large group of universities. Soot seems to be a widely used framework for the static analysis of Java programs in academia. Having individual publications with over 500 citations and nearly 500 article mentioning your work is an extremely non-trivial accomplishment in computer science. —Ruud 17:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just added to the article:
In 2010, two research papers on Soot (Vallée-Rai et al. 1999 and Pominville et al. 2000) were selected as IBM CASCON First Decade High Impact Papers among 12 other papers from the 425 entries.^[1]

—Ruud 17:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say that on that page? I can see one paper ('Soot: a Java bytecode optimization framework') which was written by the research group about their own work. --Michig (talk) 17:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to SableVM, which is where the notability is. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing admin: if the close is merge, I'm happy to do it if you ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose a merge between Soot and SableVM. Despite being created by the same depeartment, they are separate tools, both independently notable. —Ruud 11:25, 1 December 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, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:14, 2 December 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.

^ http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1925805

[1] ttp://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1925805

[1]