Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Service-oriented Software Engineering

Service-oriented Software Engineering

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

No evidence that this concept is notable within the computing field. No references at all. Article was PRODded, original author promised to improve it but hasn't touched the article for more than a year. That's plenty of time to see improvement, but there's been none. Time to go now. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete, with possible later re-creation. Service-oriented software engineering (SOSE) does exist, but there is no information in this stub worth keeping. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 09:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete, with possible merge or later re-creation. Agree with Radagast3; might be worth another attempt as part of the software engineering page, but there's nothing here right now. -- BenTels (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.
Redirect, weakly. The current title is a dictionary definition of a non-notable neologism. Current text says this is a software engineering methodology based on service-orientation. Now, "service-orientation" has an unreadable and vague article that, to the extent it's about anything, would appear to be about software. That article has its own set of problems, and probably qualifies for deletion in its current state, but would appear to cover anything that might be said here. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge GScholar shows many articles (e.g., the doctoral dissertation [1]). Anything "service-oriented" suffers from the vagueness of that term (cf. Service-oriented_architecture). However, there's "something there" there. I'll add more cites later. — HowardBGolden (talk) 17:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]