Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LassoLab

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. The consensus is that there are no reliable, independent sources establishing the notability of this software PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 05:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LassoLab

[edit]
LassoLab (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)

No assertion of any notability and no evidence of notability. Only refs are a press release published on yahoo and own web-site  Velella  Velella Talk   21:30, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep SeanStephens Speaking as the CEO, LassoSoft was expressly requested by the Lasso community to write this content, as past content has been (or is) incorrect currently listed on Wikipedia. There have been thousands of downloads of LassoLab - many more than many of the comparable articles posted on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eclipse-based_software. Also, as Lasso has millions of web pages live on the web with a 20 year history of tens of thousands of users and is poorly and incorrectly represented on Wikipedia. I'll admit, I have no idea how to use WIkipedia, and would rather not make edits. —Preceding undated comment added 23:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete or Merge Seems the article is an advertising page, created by the Lasso CEO. However, it is important, as it's the IDE for the Lasso product. I think it should be merged into Lasso with a small section describing the prodict or heavily expanded. It could be really innovative bit software, after all these guys are striking out from the main Asp.net\php\Oracle pl/sql\Java web development crowd. scope_creep talk 19:08 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Lasso (programming language) has similar issues, probably should be deleted as well (not much of a recommendation) TEDickey (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, the Lasso (programming language) article describes a major product line. It's an very well established web framework from an established company. It is clearly notable. Have a look at Talk:Lasso (programming language) The article itself is mostly well written bu needs work in some sections. scope_creep talk 19:59 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no - what the talk page tells me explicitly is that it's a niche product ("major" is not an applicable term), with perhaps a few hundred users (half of the discussion is written by people who are involved with developing or promoting the product). To see what "major" might apply to, look at these, which list languages which are orders of magnitude more common:

"comparing" something to php for instance does not actually mean that the two are comparable in terms of the number of users. Lacking WP:RS, the reader is likely to conclude that it's simply another product description which hasn't been deleted yet TEDickey (talk) 08:28, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is a fallacious argument. First of all your comparing a programming language to a what is essentially a large and mature web application stack. It not the same thing. Secondly your using commonality of programming languages as a basis of importance. These sites, like Tiobe.com rely on job advertising sites to aggregate, summarize and compile their lists, which is dubious at best. Being at the top of the list doesn't automatically confer more importance or notability than those items at at the bottom. Of course, if it's at the top of the list, it's more likely to be notable, but not automatically notable by default. Take TCL for instance, a wee obscure language, which is at the bottom of most lists of this type. It's at the bottom of most lists of this type. But at the same time, it's used in a very large number of old embedded systems, and used in the utilities industry, particularly in control systems for power stations, here in Europe (don't know about continents). It's both notable and important, but from your argument, it wouldn't be. It's out of site, out of mind, out of fashion, but exceedingly important. Secondly according to some of the comments on the talk, it's a FileMaker shoe in, which was vastly popular in the early to late 90's, one of the big 3 database systems before Windows, then it's clearly notable. Particularity if it's used by the top 15000 institutions. scope_creep talk 15:23 15 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.232.253 (talk)
you appear to have missed the point: there are no reliable sources given to support any of your comments. Talk page comments are not a reliable source, and don't have anything to do with demonstrating notability. Bye. TEDickey (talk)

User:Bfad5e Speaking as someone who uses LassoLab and has used other Eclipse-based products in the past, I'd say keep. Some of what they are doing is what's common to all these language tools, and some of it is innovative, but even if there's nothing innovative about it, why not keep with all the others? Just because you've not heard of a programming language before doesn't mean it's not important or significant, it just means you're unfamiliar with it. —Preceding undated comment added 13:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC) — Bfad5e (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
USER:Steffan Cline
  • Keep After reading through the comments above, the nay-sayers seem to be confused about a few things. One, the list of software based on Eclipse are all independently notable if they are released for a reasonably-sized user base. This helps new individuals use the information on Wikipedia to help them navigate the development tools they use on a day to day basis. There are many other comparably sparse articles, who should all be seen as "notable". A brief walk through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eclipse-based_software shows you a list of similar articles who are also relevant to users of Wikipedia;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actifsource https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFEclipse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_Composer_Studio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EasyEclipse

  • and many more...

In addition, the biologist above missed the point: LassoLab is free, open-source, and built in Java, not Lasso. It is free, and based on Eclipse, like many other IDEs. However, it's not the only tool used to develop in Lasso. Most developers use Coda, BBedit, DreamWeaver, Sublime, etc., as proven in a recent poll of Lasso developers. This should not be merged into Lasso page, or it implies that it is the most popular or most important one. the Here are the other more popular ones; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coda_(web_development_software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bbedit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamweaver https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublime_Text https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_studio The fact that this software is "released" by LassoSoft is irrelevant. It's an important piece of software for an emerging language (Lasso 9) with a 20 year history of developers and strong connections to many of the Fortune 500 and thousands of businesses worldwide. As for the notability guidelines - this is a recent development in the Lasso language and the first version. It should be given a fair chance for external writers and bloggers to find it and write about it by referencing the article on Wikipedia. It deserves a separate article like other Eclipse-based-software and should not be merged, but be an independent article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steffan Cline (talk • contribs) 03:14, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

of course, the reader may notice that most of the promotional comments have been made by persons having a decided conflict of interest, and that reliable sources have generally been ignored in this discussion. TEDickey (talk) 10:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some Lasso community members have suggested on an external forum that perhaps the solution is to add a secondary article listing the commonly used Lasso editors (comparable to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PHP_editors, for example). As there is no listing on the web of editors used by the Lasso community, it is difficult for reliable sources to contextualize how Lasso is edited, and thus individuals with little or no development experience (as per above) would not find any of the Eclipse-based editors notable. SeanStephens 11:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seanstephens (talk • contribs) — Seanstephens (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/LassoLab&oldid=1137981327"