Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antiobjects

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2011 July 21.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:39, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Antiobjects

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

Almost orphan page, linked only by AgentSheets and originally created by user Dragentsheets. Only two substantial edits from someone else: one from User:Ozten, the other from a French academic IP adding a link to a paper published by French scholars. Also, the original antiobjects paper has seven citations, and Google (Books, Scholar) references to Antiobject(s) almost invariably refer to something completely different (certainly not computer science. --bala^biot 12:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.
Delete. Non-notable neologism about a computational metaphor useful to conceptualize and solve hard problems by swapping computational foreground and background; your guess is good as mine. The term has been coined independently and used in several contexts, mostly having to do with antimatter, but its meaning is fairly obvious or trivial in that context, and this is apparently original research about a programming philosophy. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - A programming philosophy which does not appear to have gained traction. Coverage in relaible sources, particularly Google Scholar appears rather thin. Most of the google scholar hits on antiobjects are about physics rather than computing and are about a different concept. -- Whpq (talk) 14:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, 7 citations, most of which are the authors citing themselves. Abductive (reasoning) 06:22, 21 February 2011 (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.