Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MSQL-JDBC
- 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:16, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
MSQL-JDBC
- MSQL-JDBC (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
nn software - üser:Altenmann >t 04:42, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. sst✈(discuss) 05:58, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, clpo13(talk) 09:41, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, clpo13(talk) 09:41, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. There is no reason to keep this Information as the driver has been replaced by more advanced and up to date drivers. The information on this page is also of questionable notability as the only thing that seems even remotely noteworthy is it was the first JDBC Driver which has no real source to prove the statement. All this combined with the lack of Information leads me to believe there is no point in keeping this. Andrdema (talk) 05:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Software article of unclear notability, lacking independent references. The one ref is to a book by the author of the software, and in any case is an incidental mention. A search turned up forum posts and incidental mentions, but no significant RS coverage.Dialectric (talk) 16:38, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- 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.