Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knowledge Grid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by W Nowicki (talk | contribs) at 20:24, 17 October 2011 (Knowledge Grid: propose merges and disambig for three meanings). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Knowledge Grid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Prod contested without rationale. Essay, original research, single-source, promotional in tone, neologism. Wtshymanski (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, not really sure about this one Lots and lots of hits including an article in CACM suggest that this is real; however the current version focused entirely on one Chinese researcher, assuming that he's even writing about the same thing, is not the way this needs to be written. Mangoe (talk) 17:21, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh sigh, yet another "grid of wonderfulness". It looks like two professors use this term, one in Italy and one in China (plus their students, apparently). They have been doing it for several years since 2004 or so (when the term grid computing was trendy). One vendor uses the term inside a product. Not sure if that still qualifies as a neologism or not. The first two definitions seem close, while the third is substantially different. I also question the capital letters. The book title of course would be a proper name, but we generally do not have articles on each book unless it is clearly noted by independent sources. If this article is not about the book per se, then of course there is undue weight to the book as it stands. The product name could be considered a proper name, but the general concept certainly should not be in upper case if, as it says, "various Knowledge Grids[sic] exist in society..." More than one implies not a proper name. For the proper name of the single grid of all knowlege in the world, I would liken to Semantic Web but that is not mentioned at all here. A search on Wikipedia reveals that Resource Space Model is even worse, about one chapter in Zhuge's book. A web search turns up a http://www.knowledgegrid.net/ a web site for the group in English and http://kg.ict.ac.cn/ in Chinese and English. I would propose my usual, that we beef up the articles on the concept topics and reduce the speific forks. In particular the following:
  1. Merge Resource Space Model into Faceted classification
  2. Merge a short summary of Zhuge's research into Grid computing
  3. Move Knowledge Grid to redirect to Knowledge grid
  4. Convert to a disambig page pointing to the three or four articles where the variants are discussed

W Nowicki (talk) 20:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]