Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XML-Enabled Networking

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. Sandstein 13:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

XML-Enabled Networking

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

The concept of "XML-Enabled Networking" is a marketing/technical buzzword that does not really reflect anything in reality. There are no sources discussing the concept except as a marketing phrase by a company called Reactivity (who themselves don't have an article) that for a brief while sold hardware and services that claimed to provide "XML-Enabled Networking" (see this as a representative example).

I have found no other use for the phrase that is not within the marketing copy of Reactivity who were bought by Cisco in 2007. It seems likely that the concept was dreamed up at the height of XML fever in enterprise software simply as a marketing phrase to sell hardware firewalls with some protection against XML parser vulnerabilities (like the billion laughs attack etc.) to big corporate IT departments. It doesn't really make much sense as a phrase because it violates the layering principle, as you can see in the article: it isn't a protocol, it's a very vaguely defined "abstration layer".

Pretty clear failure of WP:GNG (and WP:B2B is applicable too). If someone wanted to write an article on Reactivity Inc. then it might be worth a brief mention in that article (and a redirect), but it isn't notable in and of itself. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by nominator: I'd also note that Reactivity Inc was once a page, created by the same user who started XML-Enabled Networking. It was speedy deleted under A7 (db-corp) because it did not assert significance, but based on the existence of sources about Reactivity Inc being bought by Cisco Systems (the GigaOm piece linked above, for instance) it may pass notability. —Tom Morris (talk) 10:55, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:23, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:40, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I concur with the nom--the phrase is closely associated with Reactivity, but gained no notability outside of this company. I could find no secondary in-depth sources talking about this topic. Thus the topic seems to fail the notability guideline WP:GNG and should not remain as a standalone article. --Mark viking (talk) 05:10, 23 April 2015 (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.