Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statement syntax (MySQL) (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ESkog (talk | contribs) at 07:45, 24 July 2006 (Closing debate; result was delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 07:45, 24 July 2006 by ESkog (talk | contribs) (Closing debate; result was delete)
- 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 delete. (ESkog)(Talk) 07:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This was previously nominated in March, 2005. The article had two robot edits since then and no other improvements. The article is not encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a programming manual. The content of this article will never be more insightful or more current than the documentation pages (available for free, online) at mysql.com. Mikeblas 10:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. An eyesore as well. --Brad101 13:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete abortive attempt at creating a programming-manual article. Lukas (T.|@) 14:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, albeit MAJOR REWRITE or transwiki (is that right?) to the WikiBooks section of this website 216.141.226.190 12:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Note that the outline as it stands in the article isn't correct (
SELECTisn't DML, for example; it's DQL). It also isn't complete; I'd estimate that the outline includes about 5% of the keywords that the language recognizes, not to mention the other background information (data types, execution model, and so on) that needs to be covered in order to establish adequate context for such an article. A "MAJOR REWRITE" would take two people about six months, and they'd finish with something that isn't as accurate or as up-to-date as what the MySQL project makes available at their own website. -- Mikeblas 13:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Note that the outline as it stands in the article isn't correct (
- Delete per nom and above. -- NORTH talk 20:30, 23 July 2006 (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.