Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stardog

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stardog[edit]

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

Was tagged for notability over a year and a half ago. Zero improvement since then. Searches do not turn up the type of in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show it passes either WP:GNG or WP:PRODUCT. Non-notable product from non-notable company. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:45, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for lack of notability, based on invalid citation. Of the 6 footnotes, 4 point to the company itself and the other two point to a small (1-10 employees according to LinkedIn) private company instead of a valid secondary source. This appears to be an article created to show notability by having a Wikipedia article, because it can't demonstrate such otherwise. -Markeer 13:26, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 14:32, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I created the page to link from Graph_database as most of the software listed there is included in wikipedia. I'm happy to include more content on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhgrove (talk • contribs) 11:30, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Of the two third-party sources cited, one is an interview that simply reports the company's claims without verifying them in any way – which makes it hardly different from a republished press release – and the other is a blog post that simply summarises the company's claimed optimisations without verifying them in any way.--greenrd (talk) 09:24, 16 April 2017 (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.