Talk:Cosmos DB
Add topicLatest comment: 7 years ago by Sidney.Andrews in topic Deprod
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Deprod
[edit]A simple WP:BEFORE search shows articles about it in Dr. Dobbs, Infoworld, and Information Week. There is a Packt book devoted to it Learning Azure DocumentDB and an online class about it at Pluralsight. All of these contribute to notability and make the prod controversial. Hence, a deprod. --Mark viking (talk) 20:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- I think it would make more sense to merge this article into Microsoft Azure. While not particularly encyclopedia-worthy by itself, Azure as a whole is a notable cloud platform. If we continue to allow articles to exist for every product provided by every commercially-successful cloud provider, this information would become scattered throughout many small articles as the cloud industry grows, and readers will have a poor experience navigating the information. --Matt0401 (talk) 07:58, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
- At least is acknowledged that at the forfront that this article is poor. And it still poor after 3 years. Well, I think it's still worthy to have an article about the CosmosDB. There is one for CockroachDB, Spanner and DynamoDB, those are in much better shape though. i⋅am⋅amz3 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:45, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
This article seems to rely heavily on [docs.microsoft.com] for references and could use an increase in variety of references. Sidney.Andrews (talk) 18:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Deprecated
[edit]In Azure Storage Explorer, there is a "deprecated" keyword.
Is this techno deprecated? Or just the file visualisation in Azure Storage Explorer ?