Talk:InfoTrac

message: *The following talks are from the Infotrac discussion page. Combined with this one due to combination of the main article --Jingshen 08:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk from Infotrac page 

message: Hi, all. With the free access I get to this archive via my local (U.S.A.) public library, I see the InfoTrac resource there is also labeled as the "Expanded Academic ASAP" index, evidently one of the archive products offered under the InfoTrac trademark. Since this is so widely recognized and so widely used a reserach tool, and since my time is short, I'm not going to add refs to manifest notability. But search google news archive ( not just google news ) and you'll find dozens of news articles in e.g. Library Journal as well as the popular press that mention or discuss the "Expanded Academic ASAP". I've removed the notability tag in this edit, but have retained the previously existing cite tag.  – OhioStandard (talk) 04:10, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability tag removal 

message: InfoTrac was and still is a commonly available and well-known database that for many years has been found in university libraries around the world and has a user base in the millions.  Questioning its notability is nearly as bizarre as questioning the notability of America Online, CompuServe, Minitel, LexisNexis, Dialog, etc.  --Coolcaesar (talk) 04:33, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Widely known is not, however a criteria satisfying WP:GNG. We require sources. Could you provide some? This was proposed for speedy before, and notability tag has been added and removed from here before, all without anyone adding good sources. Ping User:DGG, User:Randykitty. Note I am not currently proposing this for deletion, I am just asking - can anyone find a source that shows this topic satisfies GNG/NSOFT? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:07, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Infotrac is very highly notable. It's not a database as such, but what we call a database aggregator, and it was one of the pioneers for such systems, including periods using with quite a number of formats and delivery methods, most of them eventual dead ends until the web has gotten them somewhat standardized--the article discusses them very well.   The trademark is not as important now as it used to be, and there have been a good many acquisitions and name changes and the like within the industry all through its history, but notability is permanent. The article needs referencing, and there are available sources--all library databases get extensively reviewed in great detail both because of their importance   to library service, and their very high expense -- up to an order of magnitude higher than any other library resource -- (as I well know, having written a few such reviews, tho never for their product in any of its incarnations).     I will try to find someone with the time to do it.  DGG ( talk ) 06:20, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper notability tagging by [[User:Piotrus]] in September 2015 

message: The redirect General OneFile has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Utopes (talk / cont) 05:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:General OneFile]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]