I'm no PostgreSQL expert, and I don't want to step on anyone's toes or get into an edit war, but the tag currently reads a bit too much like an advertisement to me right now.

Examples (with emphasis from me):

  • PostgreSQL is a powerful, open source object-relational database system. Open source since 1996, it has a proven architecture that has earned it a strong reputation for reliability, data integrity, and correctness. Standards compliance is a major focus of the development team.
  • An enterprise class database, PostgreSQL boasts sophisticated features such as Multiversion concurrency control (MVCC), point in time recovery, asynchronous and synchronous replication, tablespaces, nested transactions (savepoints), online/hot backups, a sophisticated query planner/optimizer and write ahead logging for fault tolerance.
  • PostgreSQL has won praise from its users and industry recognition, including the Linux New Media Award for Best Database System and five time winner of the The Linux Journal Editors' Choice Award for best DBMS.
  • Best of all, PostgreSQL's source code is available under a liberal open source license: the PostgreSQL License.

Now I get that the original author probably really likes PostgreSQL, but if this were Wikipedia, it would probably get flagged for weasel words and/or unverifiable statements.

Do any of these statements enhance the tag, or give instructions on how to use the tag? It makes me want to look more into PostgreSQL, but do statements like these really belong in a tag wiki?

  • 3
    Gah. It's mostly copied from PostgreSQL's about page, just not in the same order... – Mat Aug 2 '12 at 17:40
  • If you want to improve it, be my guest. And yes, I really like PostgreSQL, it's my day job :-) – Frank Heikens Aug 8 '12 at 19:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .