Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Window function (SQL)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Just Chilling (talk | contribs) at 04:43, 12 March 2008 (complete template). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 04:43, 12 March 2008 by Just Chilling (talk | contribs) (complete template)
- 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 merge and redirect to Select (SQL). There was a clear consensus that the subject is encyclopaedic. However, no convincing evidence was presented that this could ever be more than a stub. A merge looks a generally acceptable action. TerriersFan (talk) 22:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't give any information on the topic, very difficult to understand, needs more attention if it should stay on Wikipedia. Redmarkviolinist Drop me a line 22:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
These are not arguments under the WP deletion policy. Do you claim that the subject is not substantive enough that it can become a non-stub article? --Macrakis (talk) 22:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep on notable subject per WP:RUBBISH -Halo (talk) 23:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Select (SQL) for now. The subject is valid but in general we haven't been writing single articles for every SQL clause and keyword. Mangoe (talk) 00:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merging with
Select (SQL)is OK with me, but I think there is more to say about Window functions than there is about where (SQL), having (SQL), group by (SQL), and other Category:SQL keywords.... --Macrakis (talk) 16:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merging with
- Merge to Select (SQL) -- Whpq (talk) 19:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect Creating a section within an established article can attract some slightly more encylopedic writing, as opposed to code and technical terms. --NickPenguin(contribs) 03:00, 11 March 2008 (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.