Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MonoRail

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 speedy keep. nom withdrawn (non-admin closure) Pcap ping 16:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MonoRail[edit]

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

Another .NET CMS, which seems to fail WP:GNG. Pcap ping 09:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 09:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Besides the ton-o-blogs, I found a 2/3-page comparison with ASP.NET MVC in this 2009 book. I'm inclined to withdraw this, but I'm leaving it open for a while, maybe more WP:RS sources can be found. Pcap ping 09:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - A couple of mentions: [1], [2]. Still somewhat shy of WP:GNG. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 14:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Another Dr. Dobbs article claims ASP.NET MVC was "Clearly inspired by Castle MonoRail" Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 15:55, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I had found those; a bit POV given the plethora of MVCs out there, which could have inspired MS. There are significant differences if you read the comparison in the book I found above. But, I also found significant coverage in this other book (10 pages or so). Oddly enough, I wasn't able to find a single in-depth magazine article. I even searched for its former name "Castle on Rails". Anyway, this is enough for me. I'm withdrawing this before some real deletionsts waltz onto this AfD :-) Pcap ping 16:02, 21 February 2010 (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.