Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GT.M

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 keep. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 15:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GT.M

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Unable to verify notability in any reliable sources. -- samj _in ^out 10:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unreferenced article about some kind of software: a high-performance schemaless database engine, optimized for transaction processing. And it's "high performance" and "optimized" too! - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Did anyone search the news archive for Graystone Technology? Many hits in mainstream newspapers, and not press releases. Seems a notable company. I don't know if the database product itself is notable or not: pretty old product, there were no reviews on the net in 1986, but we should probably have an article on the company, and their database engine can be a part of it; see product history. Based on the longevity of the software, that probably makes it notable too. Pcap ping 22:55, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep The product still gets mentioned in 3 books as of 2005-2006 (no full text, so I can't judge coverage). Software in use and written about for 30 years seems notable enough to me. It has only been open sourced recently. So the prudent here is to keep the article and just remove the spammy language. Secondary sources clearly exist, although unless someone make a trip to the library, it's hard to tell how much secondary coverage there is. Pcap ping 23:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Also listed amongst the healtcare (solution) partners of Red Hat: [1] [2]. Pcap ping 23:42, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong reason. If American Banker is to be believed, this is like trying to delete the Microsoft Windows of the banking industry because Fidelity Information Services is supposedly the number one company in the world in banking software solutions, and GT.M is now maintained by them, and used as backend for their banking app. I've added other uses, including being the backend of VA's open source WorldVistA; see [3]. The latter could have been easily found by just checking "what links here" WP:BEFORE nominating this for deletion. Pcap ping 01:10, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If the software were so verifiably notable then one would think it would be easy to find references on the Internet, no? I'm not too fussed either way but if there are dead tree references then they're no good if they're not actually referenced. -- samj _in ^out 04:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Verfiability of the stuff I wrote above is not in question; I had added references "from the Internet". But don't expect a PC World review of this product because they don't cater to that market. Go check out the books found on gbooks from a library if you want to gauge dead tree coverage. Pcap ping 10:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to see Web 2.0 kind of coverage, here is 33 pages of GTM for the Python programmer. M/Gateway isn't related to FIS, so it's independent coverage. Pcap ping 10:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep This product is alive and well - I know because I manage it and we have an active team of developers who put out major releases regularly. http://fis-gtm.com redirects you to the home page. http://sourceforge.net/projects/fis-gtm gets you to the project page at Source Forge where you can download it under the AGPL v3 license and where you can see that it has a multi-year history of active releases and has been downloaded thousands of times. Notable uses of GT.M include a couple of the largest real-time core processing systems live anywhere in the world running the FIS Profile application. As the technology platform for FIS Profile, GT.M is the legal system of records for tens of millions - perhaps over one hundred million - bank accounts around the world. It is the platform for FOSS deployments of VistA, the health care information system developed by the US Department of Veterans Affairs and increasingly used outside the US Federal Government system. There are deployments of VistA on GT.M on Linux live at hospitals and clinics in the US and Mexico, and the Kingdom of Jordan is deploying electronic health records for the entire country using VistA on GT.M on Linux. There are production sites running GT.M in mission critical applications with aggregate database sizes in the Terabytes. Uses of GT.M are a matter of public record. User:bhaskar 02:51 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Comment: Thanks for declaring your conflict. I wasn't aware that being "alive and well" was a criteria for inclusion - I'm "alive and well" and you don't see an article about me in Wikipedia now, do you (even if one is possibly justified)? -- samj _in ^out 04:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Stop bludgeoning every keep. "Alive and well" is the least argument raised here. Pcap ping 10:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep Health Care references : medsphere referes it here ; RedHat has listed it in its healthcare products partner here ; WorldVista.org refers it as open source vista platform here. linux.org lists it in applications Looks like it even has a module in CPAN. There is mention in ACM here. openvms.org mentions it here Financial references : ING direct uses GT.M. The article might require rework in terms of references, but that doesn't qualify for removal. It is a widely used product in the banking and healthcare industry. Since it is not a people's database like say Oracle, there aren't many references in the web.. Kishore (talk) 15:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep GT.M is used by OpenStreetMap for their XAPI services. It also appears to be used as the main database platform for many of the hospitals in Mexico. 80N (talk) 15:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 10:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 10:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep The GT.M engine is promoted as a part of an open source EMR solution stack. It is in production use across the US and internationally (see Mexico reference above, plus the Jordan implementation will be powered by GT.M). Medsphere's open source community hosted and collaborated on an integration project over the past year. Regardless, I don't really understand why this article would be a candidate for deletion given it provides historical information on the GT.M technology. Isn't wikipedia supposed to contain historical entries? Bmehling (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Sure, notability is not temporary. -- samj _in ^out 18:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep GT.M referenced by Gartner in their 2006 Core Banking Magic Quadrant and ditto for 2008. GT.M included as a NoSQL database in Alex Popescu's MyNoSQL site and in the NoSQL "Ultimate Guide".Rtweed1955 (talk) 09:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the Gartner MQ would qualify as an independent award of sorts so this is perhaps the strongest argument yet. I'm unconvinced the size/shape/quantity/etc. of users is relevant. -- samj _in ^out 18:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. MUMPS has been around for what, 30 years? And this is one of the main implementations of it. You delete this, you have pretty much wipe out all of the MUMPS part of wikipedia if you follow the same deletionist logic. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 02:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: More like 40 years. MUMPS, SQL, UNIX, and C all have origins circa 1970. Evidently an extraordinarily creative time for software. Bhaskar (talk) 15:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the news sources found. Dream Focus 20:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snowball Keep due to massive noteability and importance. Article has been substantially improved since the nom. FeydHuxtable (talk) 13:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do not see substantial improvement since the nomination. The references I see are trivial, PR, or directories. This meets my personal deletion criteria that articles must be written to reliable sources. I will AGF that the rollouts of this software in multiple large organizations meets some undefined state of notability and the rest of the article (such as example functionality) can be verified.

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.