Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Online database

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 redirect‎ to Database. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Online database

[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)

Almost all sources for this article are from the 1990s, which is appropriate because this subject became a thing people talked about around that time, and stopped being a thing people talked about some time thereafter (now we would just talk about a database). This wouldn't be fatal if the article was about the emergence of online databases, but it isn't. It's a WP:DICDEF about online databases and cloud databases, with some other stuff thrown in. This article has almost no chance of ever being more. Vadder (talk) 00:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Vadder (talk) 00:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to database. This article seems unnecessary and the database article already talks about online databases. Perhaps some of the content could be usable in the main article, but I couldn't say for certain. I don't think this specific case is WP:NOTABLE enough to warrant its own article. Beachweak (talk) 01:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Looks like a 90s computer thing article that got recently updated with a cloud software bit. Nothing worth saving. Oaktree b (talk) 02:02, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Or redirect as suggested above, I'm not that fussed either way. Oaktree b (talk) 02:03, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to database I don't see an ounce of difference between "Online database" and "database" User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Database. Databases do not have to be online, but that's the only difference, and it's not a notable difference. Meters (talk) 06:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or possibly merge to database, as per above. I don't actually see a section/paragraph discussing them in that article, but I don't think it really matters. Ships & Space_(Edits) 23:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Satisfies GNG easily and by a wide margin. The article is capable of being expanded beyond a definition. WP:NOTDICTIONARY says "articles that contain nothing more than a definition should be expanded with additional encyclopedic content", not deleted or merged or redirected. Most databases are not online, and online databases have their own features and their own history. Arguing that this article should be merged into Database is like arguing that Laptop should be merged into Computer, even though they are not actually the same topic. We don't merge notable subtopics. James500 (talk) 10:22, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - as I read this, my ancient Gen X elbows, knees, and shoulders ache. Kids these days! Bah humbug! Bearian (talk) 03:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC) Merge as per the whippersnappers. It's 11:00 pm. Time for gramps to go to bed. Bearian (talk) 03:59, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Database: The only Keep vote here doesn't actually explain why online databases are a notable subtopic of databases. I would need to see sources with quotations that discuss the distinction, which we don't have. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:00, 14 December 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.