Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PyCharm

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. Overwhelming consensus to Keep this article. But it would really benefit the article if the many, many sources that Keep voters say exist were added to the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PyCharm

[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)

Fails GNG and poorly sourced. Was redirected earlier in the year but this was reverted recently. This should either be deleted or redirected back. Anarchyte (talk) 05:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:04, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I am not sure why you feel that it fails GNG, but I was able to easily find sources in the popular tech press about PyCharm, and there are plenty of handbooks and tutorials and manuals published by tech houses as well. PyCharm is more or less a household name among developers. Elizium23 (talk) 09:11, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide some? All I could find were primary sources or articles that struggled to pass RS (or if they did, were only passing mentions alongside other IDEs). Anarchyte (talk) 12:29, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not who you responded to, but to help: Here's ZDnet covering a new release: https://www.zdnet.com/article/pycharm-heres-what-python-programming-language-developers-get-in-new-ide-update/ and Visual Studio Magazine coverage of VS Python taking over the 'most used' Python IDE position from PyCharm: https://visualstudiomagazine.com/articles/2022/07/12/python-vs-code.aspx TechRepublic reviewing it and Jupyter together/against each other, a lot of the feature list can be sourced to this: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/jupyter-notebook-vs-pycharm/ InfoWorld covering the support for Apple's M1 ARM chip from last year: https://www.infoworld.com/article/3602670/pycharm-python-ide-backs-apple-silicon.html and XDA News covering the addition of remote development tools last year: https://www.xda-developers.com/jetbrains-remote-development/ --WhoIs 127.0.0.1 ping/loopback 12:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for those, I didn't see a couple of them when I was looking. I'm not enthusiastic about the ZDNet or Infoworld articles as they seem to be a patch notes rundown without much additional commentary. Not to say they aren't RSs, but as I see it, they don't play too heavily in favour of notability. For transparency, another possible source I found was this, but as the writer isn't listed under staff, it may be safer to take the WP:FORBESCON approach. Anarchyte (talk) 12:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not super familiar with Builtin as a source, and probably wouldn't use it without more digging, but that author's profile is listed under 'our editorial staff' if thats your only concern: https://builtin.com/our-editorial-staff/artturi-jalli --WhoIs 127.0.0.1 ping/loopback 13:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
He's not listed on Our Staff and is categorised under "expert contributors". Anarchyte (talk) 04:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. (I am surprised to see we don't have articles for most of the rest of their IDEs; many of them are also household names.) ℰmi1y_⧼T·C⧽ 10:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. PyCharm is as popular as Intellij IDEA. This easily passes GNG. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:51, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@0xDeadbeef and 3mi1y: WP:POPULARITY. Anarchyte (talk) 12:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I get what the essay is conveying, but my primary reason for keeping is that it meets GNG. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not sure how the nom reached the conclusion that it fails GNG, but PyCharm has substantial coverage in reliable sources. --WhoIs 127.0.0.1 ping/loopback 12:01, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think 127's comment above show enough significant coverage to meet WP:GNG. I wish eweek wasn't excluded from archive.org because I'm curious about that source, but even without it WP:GNG is satisfied per the above. - Aoidh (talk) 05:59, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the nomination is based on the false premise that the sourced that the article cites are the same as the sources that exist. Partofthemachine (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Trivially notable. Arguable most popular development environment for a very popular language. Overwhelming amount of sources. --Mvqr (talk) 13:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Straightforward keep per the GNG. There aren't many IDEs more notable than this one. DFlhb (talk) 17:30, 29 November 2022 (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.