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 merge to Software as a service. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 19:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OpenSaaS[edit]

OpenSaaS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The term is mostly used as a marketing buzzword by just a few companies, most notably, NuCivic, which is was owned by the editor who created the article. It looks like the term has not really catched up in the industry. Closest thing to an independent reliable source is a Forbes contributed article from 2014 and this. MarioGom (talk) 18:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:31, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not a notable neologism. Largely promotional. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:10, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not planning to vote on the the question of whether or not the article should be deleted. However, I would like to clarify my relationship to the article and to NuCivic. MarioGom states that NuCivic "is owned by the editor who created the article" (me). In fact, I have not owned NuCivic since December 2014, when Andrew Hoppin and I sold the company to GovDelivery (subsequently merged with Granicus). Andrew and I continued to work together at GovDelivery/Granicus until the end of 2016, when Andrew left the company. I still work at Granicus, but I no longer work on projects that can be classified as OpenSaaS. Andrew used the term in particular with reference to DKAN, a Drupal-based open source software project that NuCivic created which is used to build open data websites. In 2017, Granicus sold its DKAN/open data practice to a different company named Civic Actions. Some of the personnel who were previously NuCivic employees have gone to work at Civic Actions, but I have remained at Granicus where I am working on other projects. It is therefore fair to say that I *was* an owner of NuCivic when I created this article, but I am no longer an owner and am no longer involved directly with projects that can be called OpenSaaS. I still consider Andrew Hoppin a friend, but he and I no are no longer in business together. The question of whether OpenSaaS is sufficiently notable to merit inclusion in Wikipedia is a decision that others here should make rather than me. Just now I Googled the term and found some recent uses and discussions of the concept:

• https://roomify.us/blog/state-drupal-opensaas-and-what-next
• https://siliconangle.com/2015/09/26/opensaas-and-the-brave-new-enterprise-world/
• https://mjskok.com/the-future-is-opensaas

--Sheldon Rampton (talk) 02:44, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sheldon Rampton: Thanks for the clarification. I have updated my initial comment accordingly. Note that both articles should have been sent initially as a draft, as the conflict of interest policies stipulates. About the sources you mention:

• 1. Self-published source from someone in the Drupal comunity.
• 2. Brief coverage in relation to the Drupal community.
• 3. Marketing fluff from a company related to Drupal.

So no, there are no independent reliable sources that cover significant usage of the term beyond Drupal and companies related to the Drupal community. A mention about the term in the Drupal article might be relevant, but this article does not belong to Wikipedia. --MarioGom (talk) 12:11, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@MarioGom: Thanks for the explanation about creating articles as drafts. I was fairly involved in the Wikipedia community until 9 or 10 years ago but have been less active since then. The system for creating articles as drafts did not exist when I was actively editing, and I actually did not realize that this system existed until you posted your comment here. You'll note that in the Andrew Hoppin article which I created, I made a point at the time of posting a comment in the article's talk page, disclosing my relationship with Andrew for the sake of transparency. I understand the importance of adhering to Wikipedia's COI policy, and I think the draft system makes sense as an enhancement of that policy, so I will bear that in mind in the future. Regarding the term "OpenSaaS" specifically, the term originated within the Drupal community and was not coined by anyone at NuCivic, although it was one of the concepts that we tried to incorporate into our company strategy. Since the term did not originate with us, I did not see it as something that we owned or that entailed a conflict of interest any more than it would be a conflict of interest for someone involved in open source or agile software development to create an article about open source or agile. However, I will also concede that the adoption of OpenSaaS in the marketplace (both the commercial marketplace and the marketplace of ideas) has been less rapid than I thought would be the case a few years ago. Obviously if the term was more widely used, there would be a stronger case for retaining the article, regardless of whether you feel I had a conflict of interest in creating it. --Sheldon Rampton (talk) 22:49, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Software as a service. bd2412 T 17:02, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Software as a service. --Gprscrippers (talk) 17:31, 3 September 2018 (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.