551:
magazine articles, guidebooks and instruction manuals on how to use the
Vodafone voicemail service. It still isn't notable. However, if someone writes a history of the development of voicemail and references the Vodafone service as being ground breaking then it becomes notable in its own right. In the case we are discussing here the exam is not notable, its notability extends from (is inherited from) the organisation. For it to gain independent notability there need to be independent sources discussing it.
87:
613:. I sincerely hope the quality of the arguments put forward in this discussion will be taken into account. A professional certification held by over 200,000 people in over 70 countries belongs in an encyclopedia. Several of the arguments for deletion do not appear to be based on an understanding of what the article is about.--
330:
with redirect and edit history deletion: there is a topic for this, and there is no need to spawn multiple articles on each of possible aspects. From the first glance the subject of this discussion contains some potentially valuable information, and if this impression is correct, this information
348:
per previous AfD. Describing this as spam is ridiculous. This is an internationally-recognized professional series of qualifications, covered by several published books. It has therefore clearly been the subject of non-trivial coverage. It seems bizarre that this could be considered 'not notable
550:
the exam (e.g., a book describing the history and evolution of the exam). As an analogy, the
Vodafone "voicemail" service is not notable. It is notable purely as a service of Vodafone and while it may be discussed in the Vodafone article it wouldn't warrant an article of its own. There may be
82:
55:. merge into International Software Testing Qualifications Board as suggested by the nom. I cannot see the justification of keepingtwo articles. The keep opinions are correct that the material schould be covered, but not that it necessarily needs a separate article to do so
180:
114:
109:
118:
101:
417:
It isn't 'part of the organization', it's a series of professional qualifications for which ISTQB is the international examining board. Would that be non-notable as in several independent authors having had books published about
105:
174:
97:
72:
634:
622:
597:
577:
559:
535:
517:
481:
465:
451:
427:
412:
396:
382:
358:
340:
318:
298:
275:
263:
246:
222:
66:
456:
Hmm, so a qualification is notable if we include it in the ISTQB article? Very strange reasoning. There are several books that cover these qualifications only - you can find them on Amazon.--
195:
506:
162:
327:
51:
141:
284:
254:. The organization is probably notable, but this sub-article of it is not, and it's hardly a likely search term considering that it goes through the parent, so to speak.
156:
152:
202:
509:. The qualification inherits its notability from the organisation and, on its own with no reference to the organisation, has insufficient notability.
168:
17:
314:
655:
40:
387:
The subject of the article is a series of qualifications, not a 'position'. Did you not read the article?--
88:
Articles for deletion/International
Software Testing Qualifications Board Certified Tester (2nd nomination)
557:
515:
651:
631:
594:
478:
448:
436:
qualification is not notable alone, only if we include it in the main ISTQB article. Do the books cover
409:
379:
243:
219:
36:
440:
in particular? How many are there? If they just cover the syllabi or just the organization itself (or
188:
336:
526:
Where do you get this inheritance idea from? There are books about this set of certifications.--
552:
510:
294:
272:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
650:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
628:
618:
591:
573:
531:
475:
461:
445:
423:
406:
392:
376:
354:
259:
240:
216:
83:
Articles for deletion/International
Software Testing Qualifications Board Certified Tester
332:
62:
290:
135:
614:
569:
527:
457:
419:
388:
350:
310:
255:
474:'s logo change is a notable aspect of it but does not deserve a new article.
471:
590:'s certification exams would be notable (since there are also books on it).
568:
the certification, easily sufficient to constitute significant coverage.--
57:
587:
98:
International
Software Testing Qualifications Board Certified Tester
73:
International
Software Testing Qualifications Board Certified Tester
644:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
627:
No, you could also say that of various other certifications.
444:
of its qualifications), they don't lend notability, period.
215:
this into ISTQB or just delete. This alone is not notable.
131:
127:
123:
187:
328:
International
Software Testing Qualifications Board
201:
52:
International
Software Testing Qualifications Board
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
658:). No further edits should be made to this page.
405:of the organization is non-notable on its own.
285:list of Software-related deletion discussions
8:
586:, now that I think of it. By your argument,
283:Note: This debate has been included in the
231:This does not concern the notability of the
282:
80:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
79:
24:
401:Whatever it is, this particular
331:should be merged into ISTQB. —
564:The books also include detail
349:enough' for Knowledge (XXG).--
1:
546:the exam, they are not books
675:
635:21:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
623:17:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
598:21:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
578:17:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
560:17:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
536:16:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
518:16:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
67:01:30, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
482:20:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
466:07:46, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
452:23:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
428:21:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
413:20:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
397:18:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
383:18:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
359:18:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
341:18:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
319:16:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
299:14:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
276:10:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
264:03:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
247:18:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
235:, but that of one of its
223:03:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
647:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
507:no inherited notability
78:AfDs for this article:
611:Note to closing admin
542:There are books that
505:on the same basis as
333:Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
438:this qualification
48:The result was
301:
288:
666:
649:
289:
206:
205:
191:
139:
121:
34:
674:
673:
669:
668:
667:
665:
664:
663:
662:
656:deletion review
645:
470:Yes, just like
324:Selective merge
317:
148:
112:
96:
93:
76:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
672:
670:
661:
660:
640:
639:
638:
637:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
601:
600:
539:
538:
521:
520:
499:
498:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
485:
484:
343:
321:
313:
303:
302:
279:
278:
266:
249:
237:certifications
209:
208:
145:
92:
91:
90:
85:
77:
75:
70:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
671:
659:
657:
653:
648:
642:
641:
636:
633:
630:
626:
625:
624:
620:
616:
612:
609:
608:
599:
596:
593:
589:
585:
581:
580:
579:
575:
571:
567:
563:
562:
561:
558:
556:
555:
549:
545:
541:
540:
537:
533:
529:
525:
524:
523:
522:
519:
516:
514:
513:
508:
504:
501:
500:
483:
480:
477:
473:
469:
468:
467:
463:
459:
455:
454:
453:
450:
447:
443:
439:
435:
431:
430:
429:
425:
421:
416:
415:
414:
411:
408:
404:
400:
399:
398:
394:
390:
386:
385:
384:
381:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
361:
360:
356:
352:
347:
344:
342:
338:
334:
329:
325:
322:
320:
316:
312:
308:
305:
304:
300:
296:
292:
286:
281:
280:
277:
274:
270:
267:
265:
261:
257:
253:
250:
248:
245:
242:
238:
234:
230:
227:
226:
225:
224:
221:
218:
214:
204:
200:
197:
194:
190:
186:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
154:
151:
150:Find sources:
146:
143:
137:
133:
129:
125:
120:
116:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
94:
89:
86:
84:
81:
74:
71:
69:
68:
64:
60:
59:
54:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
646:
643:
610:
583:
565:
553:
547:
543:
511:
502:
441:
437:
433:
402:
372:
368:
367:is, but the
365:organization
364:
345:
323:
306:
273:Erkan Yilmaz
268:
251:
236:
233:organization
232:
228:
212:
210:
198:
192:
184:
177:
171:
165:
159:
149:
56:
49:
47:
31:
28:
629:Jasper Deng
592:Jasper Deng
476:Jasper Deng
446:Jasper Deng
407:Jasper Deng
377:Jasper Deng
241:Jasper Deng
217:Jasper Deng
175:free images
434:particular
652:talk page
472:Windows 8
315:contribs.
291:• Gene93k
50:merge to
37:talk page
654:or in a
544:teach to
432:Look, a
369:position
309:® Spam.
142:View log
39:or in a
588:Technet
442:several
211:Either
181:WP refs
169:scholar
115:protect
110:history
632:(talk)
615:Michig
595:(talk)
584:easily
570:Michig
528:Michig
503:Delete
479:(talk)
458:Michig
449:(talk)
420:Michig
410:(talk)
389:Michig
380:(talk)
351:Michig
311:OSborn
307:Delete
271:. ----
269:Delete
256:Drmies
252:Delete
244:(talk)
220:(talk)
153:Google
119:delete
566:about
548:about
418:it?--
326:into
229:Note:
213:merge
196:JSTOR
157:books
136:views
128:watch
124:links
63:talk
16:<
619:talk
582:Not
574:talk
532:talk
462:talk
424:talk
403:part
393:talk
363:The
355:talk
346:Keep
337:talk
295:talk
260:talk
189:FENS
163:news
132:logs
106:talk
102:edit
373:not
371:is
203:TWL
140:– (
58:DGG
621:)
576:)
554:QU
534:)
512:QU
464:)
426:)
395:)
357:)
339:)
297:)
287:.
262:)
183:)
134:|
130:|
126:|
122:|
117:|
113:|
108:|
104:|
65:)
617:(
572:(
530:(
460:(
422:(
391:(
375:.
353:(
335:(
293:(
258:(
239:.
207:)
199:·
193:·
185:·
178:·
172:·
166:·
160:·
155:(
147:(
144:)
138:)
100:(
61:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.