This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

As follows from

 
http://developer.novell.com/wiki/index.php/Monouml

the files of the software have been downloaded at least 3000 times. Surely that does not tell the number of users of the software. The software may currently be non-notable. However, chances are that it is going to become notable, given it is the only free software for UML on Mono platform. Instead of deleting this page, would not it be better just to start it with a warning that the software is probably not notable? What harm does it make to run the risk of entering non-notable software articles into Wikipedia? I do not see any kinds of costs associated. -- 155.56.68.221 17:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I have removed the mark of the article that indicated the article should be deleted, based on the consideration stated in the previous paragraph. I am still confused as to why some wikipedians choose this pure-wanna-be approach to creating articles. In my view, creating quality articles, extending them, and improving them is more useful than looking around for what can be deleted. -- 155.56.68.221 17:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

There was a recent delete discussion about articles like this one here. Some wikipedians are against articles like this one here. It is difficult to keep them. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WinA&D, which has been deleted. I wrote to keep it, because it is a well known UML product. For some reasons, those counting beans by doing google searches had other opinions. There are companies, that do not spam the internet with their products. They are then treated like this. The number of google hits is not such a stringent criteria. Google can be easily fooled. But well, my concerns didn't make it through. -- Ligulem 18:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on MonoUML. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727094212/http://www.monouml.org/doku.php?id=reverseengineering to http://www.monouml.org/doku.php?id=reverseengineering
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080122013241/http://www.monouml.org/docs/ to http://www.monouml.org/docs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:23, 4 February 2018 (UTC) reply