Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of word processors

Comparison of word processors

Judging from its contents and comments on the discussion page, the purpose of this article is in fact not a comparison of word processors but a presentation of one or a few people's views of what a word processor should be. That might be a good blog post or business proposal, but it isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Furthermore, there is no information in this article that is not in the word processor article. Bill 00:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless recreated from scratch with information like the other Comparison of... pages. porges 00:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per porges. WP:NOT violated. M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, seems to be original research--TBC☆^{O M G!} 00:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - or invite the author to Merge/add the content to other articles such as word processor. - Richardcavell 01:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge per Richardcavell --M e ts501^{talk • contribs} 02:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, original research. --Ter e nc e Ong 02:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The deletes seem to be objecting to the way the article has currently been written, not to the viability of such an article in itself. Surely the whole point of a collaborative venture is that other editors will work on an article that needs improvement, not just delete it because it's not good enough. There is an article Comparison of text editors which is directly comparable to this one and demonstrates the standard that this article needs to aim for. I have put an improve tag on it and a note on the article talk page to this effect. Many articles start off poorly and change out of all recognition over time. Tyrenius 03:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tyrenius. Legitimate article - needs improvement, that's all. dbtfz ^talk 04:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this is a reasonable thing to cover; think of how useful the edit history will be in twenty years... --AlexWCovington (talk) 04:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - original research, subjective definition of word processor -- Hirudo 05:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tyrenius T e ke 05:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tyrenius and improve. E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 06:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- POV article; obvious future target for edit-wars; list-with-no-end; original research as there as (AFAIK) no agreed benchmark standards in this area -- Simon Cursitor 07:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as above--Smerus 08:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, WP:NOR. Mystache 13:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Legitimate article needing more time to evolve. As per Tyrenius. davidzuccaro 13:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]