Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Software pagination
Appearance
- Software pagination (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Sounds like a how-to. Wikipedia is not a guide. Weird article, anyway. Elm-39 - T/C 17:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete As per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. Also seems to be plagiarized from comments made here. ←Spidern→ 17:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - the article has been completely rewritten in an encyclopedic manner, which addresses the WP:NOTTEXTBOOK and copyvio concerns. LinguistAtLarge • Msg 18:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. The article needs a lot of work, is a bit of a "how to" article, and only really discusses software pagination for web pages (others uses are pagination of printed material like newspapers, magazines, directories etc.) And it needs references. But it seems to have only been created today, so perhaps the author will upgrade it. On the print side, there are a fair number of firms involved, and presumably in the Internet world it will become an increasingly important topic. pagination software has plenty of results. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- There is a page top link to document layout pagination (my field!) which explains the lack of mention in the article. Peridon (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - the topic is clearly notable. I have completely rewritten the article from scratch, and all that it needs now is some expansion and sources. LinguistAtLarge • Msg 18:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- A considerable improvement, and a more accurate title. The sources are sufficient to back up the content. Notability of this more narrow topic is clear from Web Page Pagination Aymatth2 (talk) 19:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - it's an important concept in the world of CSS and single-source publishing J L G 4 1 0 4 20:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Merge to Pagination. (Not enough material overall or difference in the concepts to justify three separate articles)Ddawkins73 (talk) 20:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I would prefer not merge, because this is just the start of an article focussed on the Internet problem, probably of interest to many web site designers. I would expect it to grow. The print pagination problem is distinctly different, since it has to juggle text or listings with related pictures and ads on fixed-dimension pages, creating links like "continued from page 47". The Internet topic is mostly about performance, and the print problem about layout. I don't see one article discussing these two different subjects. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep or Merge Not a how-to to me. It's told me about a different meaning of pagination. It's info that I don't think should be deleted. Peridon (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2009 (UTC)