Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MySQLDumper Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/MySQLDumper

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. Cirt (talk) 12:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MySQLDumper

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

I don't think this tool is notable. I've looked for reliable sources, and I haven't found any significant coverage. I've given time for others to source it - see the talk page - and I left a message with the Free Software WikiProject, but no good sources have been provided. There are some web directories, forums and blogs discussing it, but nothing I'd regard as reliable. I'm happy to be proven wrong or for a good merge target to be suggested. Fences&Windows 03:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 03:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:BURDEN. No references, no articles. Miami33139 (talk) 06:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this rule really applies to all entries you should also delete the page about PhpMyAdmin. There are only links pointing to the project page. I understand the need of reliable sources. MySQLDumper is recommanded in thousands of threads in nearly any support board of other Open Source Projects like vBulletin, Woltlab, phpBB, typo3, zikula, etc. and there are many feedbacks of users saying that this worked fine for them (e.x. User comment ). I my opinion there is a lack of conecpt here: on one hand this wiki is filled by and for the public community and on the other hand your definition of a reliable source states comments of the community as not trustworthy. MSD was developed for the community and of course this script is rated with the means of the community: blogs and boards. Is the fact, that some other systems implemented MSD in their code a reliable source (e.x. nag2web)? I simply think MySQLDumper has proven to be a useful (non profit) software (especially when no shell access is given) that really helps the community. If you are not willing to present it to the public here, I accept this. But I think it is a pity because you are hiding useful information from the community just because of the definition of reliable sources! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.5.77.187 (talk) 23:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Your complaint of PHPMyAdmin has resulted in similar requests for article sources. The reason why we require reliable sources is that Wikipedia can't be a primary source of information, and without sources the information can't be trusted. It has resulted in hoaxes and mistruths in articles that people trusted. We also require them to show notability so that Wikipedia can separate important subjects from unimportant ones. Miami33139 (talk) 05:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I deproded PHPMyAdmin, and plan to source it. Fences&Windows 02:31, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nominated, does not appear to have third party coverage. coccyx bloccyx_(toccyx) 23:02, 1 December 2009 (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.