Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IcCube

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. Owen× ☎ 20:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IcCube

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

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

Every source is self-published, excessive amount of detail guarantees undisclosed COI, can't find a single secondary source. BrigadierG (talk) 12:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:06, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Article saturated with primary sources. A before search brought nothing of note. This fails WP:GNG or WP:NSOFTWARE. Piscili (talk) 15:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both Chris Webb and Capterra are secondary sources. What is the sudden interest in a page that is there since 10 years and is fairly similar to any other page about software products or companies. WalterWartenweiler (talk) 07:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC) — WalterWartenweiler (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Do you have any connection to IcCube or its employees? BrigadierG (talk) 15:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have a connection with icCube, but here we are talking about the relevance of this page and the remarks you had about the absence of external references. And anybody discussing this page will have a form of connection with icCube.
Can we keep the discussion on topic please? WalterWartenweiler (talk) 07:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Editing Wikipedia without disclosing a conflict of interest is in violation of WP:COI, WP:UPE and can be grounds for a site block. It is more than relevant to this discussion. 82.163.218.33 (talk) 14:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And there are many other links to the icCube page from other wikipedia articles on various subjects. WalterWartenweiler (talk) 07:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And even external articles from other companies referencing the wikipedia page: https://graphsearch.epfl.ch/en/concept/40000349 WalterWartenweiler (talk) 07:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. icCube has been a part of Wikipedia for over a decade and is also referenced in multiple Wikipedia pages, including Comparison of OLAP servers. It has maintained its place in the ecosystem of OLAP solutions over the years. If the page is lacking in certain areas, I welcome improvements that bring it in line with Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and neutrality. Given its inclusion in comparative lists, it would seem odd for icCube to be the only product in that list without its own Wikipedia page, especially when others in the same category have pages. Removal could leave an incomplete representation of the market landscape, but we're open to constructive suggestions to meet Wikipedia's guidelines. (I'm one of the founders of icCube) David.alvarez.iccube (talk) 11:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC) — David.alvarez.iccube (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
I suggest you take a real hard look at WP:COI, WP:PROMO, and WP:LONGTIME and then think real hard about bludgeoning this discussion. 82.163.218.33 (talk) 14:29, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, this is getting personalDavid.alvarez.iccube (talk) 12:36, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers and WP:WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG!. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Article's subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. With the exception of the self-published blog (which is not a reliable source), all of the article's references are non-independent sources, and I could find nothing online that constituted significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. The Captera link in the external links section is user-generated content and is not a reliable source. That the article is linked elsewhere on Wikipedia (as most articles are and should be) and a site copied part of the lede from the Wikipedia article are not factors in determining the notability of an article's subject. - Aoidh (talk) 20:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you explain the 'copied part of the lede from the Wikipedia article', don't get it. Btw, are you going to delete all other OLAP solutions, i.e. Essbase ? David.alvarez.iccube (talk) 06:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:LEDE is the beginning of the article. That another site copied part of this Wikipedia article has no bearing on this article's notability or suitability as a Wikipedia article. I personally am not going to delete this article, I am commenting here as an editor but would point you to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS as far as other articles. - Aoidh (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added some reliable third party sources that I could easily find online. 2A02:1210:5819:6100:9887:B079:5547:FD7F (talk) 07:21, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of the two external links added are reliable third-party sources. This purports to be a "case study" but is actually simply a business advertising theintegration of Renjin, icCube and Inside Vision. This is neither independent nor is it significant coverage, as it is just a short blurb and per the url is listing this article's subject as one of their partners. - Aoidh (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2024 (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.