Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DBMail

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DBMail

[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)

No evidence of notability. Apparently was deleted back in 2006(!) as a PROD but said PROD was just contested and undeleted today? Didn't even know you could do that. But at the end of the day, the page hasn't been substantially improved at all, and if it wasn't sufficient in 2006, it sure isn't sufficient today. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:02, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The argument at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#DBMail makes no case that a verifiable article from independent sources can be written. It's just a technical challenge to a proposed deletion.
When it comes to independent sources, is six sentences in 2003 enough? I think not. At least two sources, and more depth is required, especially if the de-PROD request was based upon this subject as of later than 20 years ago. A couple of Polish professors in 2010 improves things. But that still makes it 1 good source plus six sentences. In the case where there's a single good overview source, I look for there being a fair number of ancillary detail sources, and there aren't any independent ones that I can find here, let alone enough.
Uncle G (talk) 10:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find independent sources and seems to be half promo. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 03:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for undeleting this entry.

DBMail is notable as it's the only IMAP server backed by an RDBMS. It's also the only one that appears to be able to scale using Docker.

I've updated the entry to be more useful, please allow time to encourage independent articles.

Thanks in anticipation, Alan Alan-hicks-london (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that according to the article, Alan Hicks has been maintaining this software since 2020. SmartSE (talk) 17:09, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find any substantial coverage and even the brief parts I have found, seem to be about a different piece of software which has some similarly named functions: [1]. SmartSE (talk) 17:18, 15 November 2023 (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.