The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I have low-weighted a lot of weak Keep !votes, particularly those not based on relevant notability guidelines, but there is still consensus here. (non-admin closure) Actualcpscm^{scrutinize, talk} 20:35, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leetcode[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

By IP: I suggest this article be nominated for AfD since it does not show why this website is notable. The only reliable source here is the Business Insider article, which is not enough. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2023 (UTC) NotAGenious (talk) 13:27, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet, Software, and Websites. NotAGenious (talk) 13:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Inviting @93.72.49.123: to join the discussion. NotAGenious (talk) 13:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Practical note: this is actually a second nomination, it was previously deleted under the name "LeetCode" in 2016. If this article is kept this time, the article should be moved to LeetCode, which currently exists as a redirect but was previously deleted. Now, to notability: Sourcing looks worse than I assumed it would. Part of the issue here is that LeetCode is ubiquitous in tech blogs and online discussions, so there are many passing mentions: 500+ hits on Google Scholar, dozens on Google Books, etc. that make finding significant coverage challenging. There has been comparatively little coverage in the mainstream or business press (e.g. see the paragraph description of the product in the New York Times). There are articles like this one from Yicai Global that seems to me to meet WP:NPRODUCT, which is published by a subsidiary of Shanghai Media Group which would be unreliable for politics but may be reliable for business news (inferring from WP:RSP). Suriname0 (talk) 16:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this is a well-known site which should have enough support from the current references and others available online such as https://www.dice.com/career-advice/coding-and-whiteboard-job-interviews-how-to-prepare. - Indefensible (talk) 17:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Dice.com is a commercial website. I do not see any editorial guidelines and there is no indication of editorial oversight. While it is possible to use it for citing content, it would not be considered reliable to establish notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:19, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure a single paragraph is enough to establish notability. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 08:14, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  That was just an example. Please do a search on Google Scholar for LeetCode: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=leetcode. I find it difficult to believe the subject would not meet on notability. - Indefensible (talk) 15:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Finding it difficult to believe is not an argument for AfD. We present our opinions based on guidelines and policies. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:48, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So to clarify, have you actually reviewed all 500+ results on Google Scholar? - Indefensible (talk) 22:06, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I have not. Am I required to? You presented an argument that Google Scholar contains the in-depth coverage required by WP:ORGCRIT (a guideline you called "imperfect"). It would be on you to present which specific Google Scholar articles meet that guideline. Your argument would be similar to me telling someone "check Google." --CNMall41 (talk) 22:29, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I just asked because you said that you ran a search and did not find enough acceptable sources, but you did not review all of the Google Scholar results. I just wanted to know and clarify. - Indefensible (talk) 22:46, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Computing. Suriname0 (talk) 18:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - References on the page and those I found in a search did not meet WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - The company fails WP:NCORP; I was unable to find any in-depth coverage of the company at all. Is the product/site notable? I was only able to find some non-reliable blog reviews (e.g. 1, 2), but I'm also not aware of any site with editorial oversight that writes traditional "reviews" for sites/products like this. Instead, I notice a number of informal discussions of the product "where author describes personal opinions and experiences" in books from publishers like Wiley and Springer Nature (Apress). The two books cited plus the coverage in the New York Times and Business Insider together comprise significant coverage of the product and its use to meet WP:NCORP. None of the individual sources comprises more than a few paragraphs (and in the case of the academic sources usually 1-2 sentences); I would love to see someone uncover a source that discusses LeetCode in more depth relative to its many competitors. Suriname0 (talk) 22:12, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So it fails NCORP but we should keep it anyway is what I believe you are saying. I am not sure what guideline would allow that other than WP:IAR. Also, none of what you described adds up to significant coverage so I must be misunderstanding your assessment of the notability requirements. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:39, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the lack of clarity: the company fails NCORP, but the product passes NCORP. The individual book sources, for example, contribute WP:SIGCOV product reviews. Suriname0 (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Leetcode is a popular site and should meet the WP:GNG at least based on user counts and general popularity. The article reads a bit like it is about the company behind the service, so it might benefit a bit from a bit of cleanup. Anton.bersh (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that a high user count is enough. WP:BIG NotAGenious (talk) 06:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep LeetCode stands as a widely recognized and exceptional company, with a reputation that echoes through the software engineering communities of the US, India, and China. This website has left an indelible mark, aiding countless engineers globally in realizing their career aspirations and setting a benchmark within the industry. Despite their limited engagement in self-promotion, their prominence remains undeniable. A brief exploration would affirm this fact. Considering their extensive user base and substantial industry influence, they undoubtedly fulfill the criteria with distinction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.47.209.29 (talk) 04:05, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hm. But is that what the reliable sources say? NotAGenious (talk) 05:52, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I understand that this doesn't meet Wikipedia's strict standard for notability, but let's be honest, since that standard was written, most sources that would have covered Leetcode have gone out of business. Category:Defunct computer magazines published in the United States. Sean Brunnock (talk) 11:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused. Your statement of "I understand that this doesn't meet Wikipedia's strict standard for notability" is an agreement that it should be deleted. I am unsure of why it should be kept then unless this is a WP:LIKE vote. Your argument is saying you disagree with community consensus on notability guidelines, not that this page doesn't meet them. Let me know if I misunderstood what you are saying. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Cui, Cong; Dossetov, Ualkikhan; Wei, Songjie (2015). "Computational Thinking Guided Programming Training for Oversea Students with Diverse Computer Literacy Skills". Journal of Information Technology and Application in Education. 4: 59–60. doi:10.14355/jitae.2015.04.008. ISSN 2227-6459. Archived from the original on 2018-06-03. Retrieved 2023-08-15.
  The article notes: "LeetCode is a website for preparing and practicing programming interviews. It has 200 questions spanning many aspects in computer programming. All are rated based on difficulties. Users can type in source code and submit for testing online. LeetCode makes a good venue for our students to learn programming, testing and debugging, with realistic industry‐interview used programming problems. The browser‐based platform is easily accessible. Some of our students even worked on problems on smartphones in their spare time. ... A good grade on LeetCode challenge implies a student’s continuous, diligent and fruitful working on LeedCode problem solving, which requires not only spending time online, but thinking in computation, and efficient coding and debugging capability."
  
  This appears to be an article published to a predatory journal. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 13:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Good catch, the publisher (Science and Engineering Publishing Company) is included on the website of Beall's List. I've stricken this source from the list. Cunard (talk) 06:35, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2. Sonmez, John; Butow, Eric (2020). Programming Interviews For Dummies. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. pp. 108–109, 219–220. ISBN 978-1-119-56502-4. Retrieved 2023-08-15 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "The LeetCode website (https://leetcode.com) is one of the best places on the web to find and practice programming problems. All you have to do to view the list of questions is click the View Questions link on the home page to open the Questions page shown in Figure 18-1. What’s more, you’ll find problems to practice that are asked of interviewees at various large companies, including Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Amazon, and many others. Just click one of the companies listed in the Companies section on the right side of the Questions page. If you want to get the most out of the LeetCode site, sign up for a membership. LeetCode gives you the option of signing up for a monthly plan if you only want to use it while you’re looking for a job, or for a yearly plan if you want to use LeetCode as a resource for one calendar year. As of this writing, the monthly subscription costs $35 per month and the yearly subscription costs $159 per year."
  The book further notes in a later chapter: "Leetcode is also a popular site for programmers who want to get up to speed. When you open the LeetCode website at https://leetcode.com, you have to sign up for an account by clicking on the Create Account button shown in Figure 8-2. After you create an account, you can sign in by clicking the Sign In link in the upper-right corner of the screen. Like Codility, LeetCode has plenty of programming topics you can learn about, and you can take tests over and over again until you get a perfect score. You can also participate in contests against other LeetCode members. LeetCode also has several additional features: ..."
3. Wu, Jiang 吴江 (2021). 高效制胜：程序员面试典型题解 [Winning with Efficiency: Solutions to Typical Programmer Interview Questions] (in Chinese). Beijing: Beijing Book Co. [zh]. ISBN 978-7-115-55198-6. Retrieved 2023-08-15 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "LeetCode是推荐最多的算法题练习网站,本书的算法题也都精选自 LeetCode。我认为LeetCode有以下几个优点。 1.测试覆盖率高。在提交代码以后,LeetCode会跑很多测试来验证代码的正确性,而且很多题目的测试对于极端边界情况、复杂度和性能的要求都有全面的考虑。为了保证代码的正确性,做题目的时候要养成审题的习惯,仔细分析题目的条件范围,不要因为极端案例导致程序失败。 2.支持的语言比较多和新。LeetCode会定期更新支持的语言的版本, 保证能够利用到最新的语言特性。 3.讨论内容丰富。LeetCode现在有中文和英文两个版本,每个版本下的评论都很丰富,通过阅读他人的评论可以加深我们对题目的理解,获得新的思路。当然,LeetCode也有一些缺点,比如题目数量太多、不够精练,而与字符串相关的练习题偏少等。"
  From Google Translate: "LeetCode is the most recommended algorithm problem practice website, and the algorithm problems in this book are also selected from LeetCode. I think LeetCode has the following advantages. 1. High test coverage. After submitting the code , LeetCode will run a lot of tests to verify the correctness of the code, and the tests of many questions have comprehensive considerations for extreme boundary conditions, complexity and performance requirements. In order to ensure the correctness of the code, you must develop a practice of reviewing the questions when doing the questions 2. There are many and new languages supported. LeetCode will regularly update the versions of supported languages to ensure that the latest language features can be used. 3. Discussion The content is rich. LeetCode now has two versions, Chinese and English, and the comments under each version are very rich. By reading other people’s comments, we can deepen our understanding of the topic and gain new ideas. Of course, LeetCode also has some shortcomings, such as the topic There are too many, not concise enough, and there are too few exercises related to strings, etc."
  The book notes: "LeetCode (力扣) 起源于美国硅谷,是最早的在线评测(Online Judge, OJ)平台之一。"
  From Google Translate: "LeetCode (力扣) originated in Silicon Valley, USA, and is one of the earliest Online Judge (OJ) platforms."
4. Liao, Shumin (2021-12-01). Litting, Tom (ed.). "IT Job Interview Prepper LeetCode Pockets USD10 Million From Lightspeed China". Yicai Global [zh]. Shanghai Media Group. Archived from the original on 2023-08-15. Retrieved 2023-08-15.
  The article notes: "LeetCode, a US startup that helps prepare software engineers for job interviews, has secured funding of nearly USD10 million from Lightspeed China Partners. ... Founded in Silicon Valley in 2011, LeetCode’s questions are widely used in interviews by major internet and tech companies. Demand for its services in China surged in 2018, so it set up a Chinese site to operate independently in the local market. ... LeetCode has over 100 million annual code submissions, and roughly half of Chinese programmers are believed to be using the platform, with many colleges and universities using LeetCode questions for auxiliary teaching."
5. Nguyen, Nhan; Nadi, Sarah (2022-10-17). "An Empirical Evaluation of GitHub Copilot's Code Suggestions". MSR '22: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories. Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 1–5. doi:10.1145/3524842.3528470.
  The article notes on page 1: "To evaluate the correctness of Copilot’s suggestions, we use LeetCode, a question pool website, which provides us with the context needed to create Copilot queries (function name, parameters, input, and output of the function) as well as test cases that we can use to evaluate correctness of the suggestions. LeetCode questions come with test cases in various programming languages, allowing us to assess the correctness of Copilot’s suggestions in 4 different languages (Python, Java, JavaScript, and C)."
  The article notes on page 2: "LeetCode. LeetCode is a popular Question Pool website (QP). Such websites provide various coding questions on different topics (array, algorithm, sorting, etc) along with corresponding tests to check correctness. ... LeetCode also provides a publicly available API to fetch submission details. Figure 2a shows an example LeetCode question, named Longest Increasing Path in a Matrix. The question contains information like the input (m x n integers matrix), the expected output (the length of the longest increasing path in a matrix), and any assumptions (no wrap-around). Each question also comes with a coding environment to submit solutions, shown in Figure 2b. This coding environment contains the function name (longestIncreasingPath) and parameters (self, matrix) with clear details into the type of each parameter."
  The book notes on page 2: "LeetCode’s coding environment also contains a set of test cases in multiple programming languages. Figure 2b shows the Python coding environment for testing a submission against LeetCode’s predefined set of test cases. ... LeetCode’s tests also ensure that submitted code snippets “meet various time and space restrictions and pass corner cases” for the given problem. Users are also able to see a history of their submission status for the current coding problem and any past code solutions submitted for the same question, as shown in Figure 2c. The possible statuses are: ..."
  The book notes on page 4: "LeetCode stops execution at the first failed test case."
6. Kolak, Sophia (2020-11-15). "Detecting Performance Patterns with Deep Learning". SPLASH Companion 2020: Companion Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Systems, Programming, Languages, and Applications: Software for Humanity. Association for Computing Machinery. doi:10.1145/3426430.3428132.
  The article notes: "Leetcode is an online platform for practicing algorithmic coding challenges designed to prepare software engineers for technical interviews. After a correct solution is submitted, leetcode provides a distribution of accepted solutions according to run-time, along with representative samples from other users along this distribution. We scraped all such available samples across 32 array problems, for a total of 1,836 code snippets. This allowed us to study real implementations of the same problem at variable run-times, and to isolate syntax as the cause of either high or low performance."
7. Siddiqui, Saleem (2022). Learning Test-Driven Development: A Polyglot Guide to Writing Uncluttered Code. Sebastopol, California: O'Reilly Media. pp. 220–221. ISBN 978-1-098-10647-8. Retrieved 2023-08-15 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "LeetCode encourages social interaction with other developers with coding contests, challenges, and discussions. The “Playground” feature allows you to write code in several languages, including Go, JavaScript, and Python. However, there are some limitations. With Go, it is not trivial to import packages outside the standard library or to run tests via go test. With Python, it’s not obvious how to run tests using the unittest package. The free version restricts the number of Playgrounds (currently 10); the paid subscription removes this restriction and offers a host of other features, such as debugging and autocompletion. Figure A-4 shows a LeetCode window with JavaScript code from Chapter 1. The test in the code has been deliberately broken test to illustrate how test failures appear in LeetCode."
8. Harper, Jocelyn (2023). A Software Engineer’s Guide to Seniority: A Guide to Technical Leadership. Wilmington, North Carolina: Apress. p. 20. doi:10.1007/978-1-4842-8783-5. ISBN 978-1-4842-8782-8.
  The book notes: "LeetCode is a platform that specializes in algorithm questions ranked from “Easy” to “Hard” based on the complexity of the subject and solution. They also have a forum where people share what interview questions they encountered in phone screens and on-site interviews to share with the larger public and to help software engineers prepare. I have been fortunate that the only time that I encountered a LeetCode problem during a screening process was for Amazon. As tedious as studying for LeetCode problems is, I have compiled steps that made solving them easier and faster as I was grinding algorithms."
9. Poundstone, William (2021). How Do You Fight a Horse-Sized Duck?: Secrets to Succeeding at Interview Mind Games and Getting the Job You Want. New York: Little, Brown Spark. ISBN 978-0-316-49457-1. Retrieved 2023-08-15 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "The equivalent for software engineers is the “LeetCode interview." LeetCode is a popular coding and interview-prep website that offers engineers hundreds of typical technical questions and interview work assignments. The right side of the Leetcode window is a code editor allowing the user to type in code in a selected language. The code can be executed (to see how well it works) or critiqued by other users. LeetCode offers a path for anyone, from 10-year-old prodigies to mid-career switchers, to learn coding. It allows users to conduct mock job interviews with questions, rated by difficulty, that have been asked at specific companies. Other sites, such as HackerRank, InterviewBit, and Topcoder, offer similar features."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow LeetCode (Chinese: 力扣) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 08:48, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
keep, reliable sources with significant coverage found: [1][2][3] plus book sources brought up above should suggest that this website is notable. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 13:48, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.