Talk:Helix ALM

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Helix ALM article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Renamed

TestTrack got renamed to Helix ALM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:2A:0:1017:0:0:0:12B8 (talk) 18:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Is there a reference or announcement for that? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found a few, but http://www.pocketgamer.biz/news/65850/perforce-helix-alm/ was the first. Moving. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:25, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Perforce

I started to clean up this article and marked a few dead links. Between the dead links and the fact that Seapine was bought by Perforce and no longer exists, what's left for sourcing isn't really enough for a standalone article. If it was recreated today as a new article, it very likely might be rejected. With the promotional info, new owner and advert hatnote, probably because of the long bullet list of features, it seemed easier to just do a merge and redirect rather than trying to fix and source this one. I saw a similar issue with Perforce Helix [[1]], which is now called Helix Core, except with that one I did a formal merge proposal first. After no objections, I made the change. I probably should have proposed the merge first, but in any case, take a look at what I added to Perforce Perforce Software#Helix ALM, and see if you think this content warrants a standalone article. If you think it does, we can work to clean up the promotional info and update it with Perforce as the current developer. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:30, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that last night and have to agree with your logic. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:24, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want to undo the revert and put the redirect back, or try to find more sources and update this version? I think the former makes more sense, given the limited coverage I was able to find. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. Too many articles on my watchlist. This was very different. Notability isn't fleeting. See WP:NOTTEMPORARY. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:31, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a problem when a product is bought and renamed. The former notability was for TestTrack and Seapine - there's less for Helix ALM as a Perforce product. Maybe this article should be renamed TestTrack, and then mention that it was renamed and point to the new section in the Perforcfe article. Otherwise, I'll have to figure out how to update this article in the right way. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with renaming it. Perhaps a move discussion would be in order. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a problem with redirecting it though. That's how this started. If a product was notable at one point, it remains notable. We don't delete articles on people when they die. We don't expunge an traces of a previous version of software when it's taken over either. For instance, OpenOffice could refer to either the original product, OpenOffice.org, or the current version, Apache OpenOffice. There have been many discussions about merging them or redirecting the former to the latter, but they're distinct products even though they share code. A redirect is not appropriate in this case either. Even though there may be dead links, the parent company no longer exists. You deciding it needs to be a redirect is not consensus. Don't do it again until you have achieved consensus. You may need to go to a larger community. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining. I just thought there was no objection since the merge discussion was quiet for ten days. To counter your point, I don't see it as deleting an article for a product that was once notable - it seems to me that based on what I can see now, it never met WP:GNG in the first place, and probably wouldn't have survived an AfD nomination. Since hardly anyone else is following this, given the silence around the merge request, I have to decide if I want to be invested enough to take your advice and start an RfC. On a related note, there's a TestTrack Pro redirect that goes to Seapine Software. If this article stays as is, this one is a better redirect target. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:44, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]