Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artifact (enterprise architecture)

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 redirect to Enterprise architecture#Developing an Enterprise Level Architectural Description. with no prejudice against recreating the article if sufficient content and sources can be found. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Artifact (enterprise architecture)

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

Article has been deleted previously for same I am proposing. A7: No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event): Essay, original research, no independent sources) Tyros1972 Talk 08:20, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Essentially a WP:DICDEF (and sadly, one I use myself, but that's my problem) appropriate for addition to Wiktionary? AllyD (talk) 08:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The existing section at Enterprise_architecture#Developing_an_Enterprise_Level_Architectural_Description covers the context in which the term is used; possibly a CSD A10 for this new article? AllyD (talk) 09:15, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Enterprise_architecture#Developing_an_Enterprise_Level_Architectural_Description that covers the same topic. Cavarrone 20:20, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or expand. There are sufficient sources for this to be a stand-alone article, but as long as it has no more contents that the suggested redirect target, no reason not to redirect. The deletion rationale (A7) was incorrect at the time of the speedy, and is still incorrect now, it doesn't fall in any of the suggested groups. Note that e.g. this book, An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture by Scott A. Bernard, has a complete chapter on "Components and Artifacts", so it is a real and notable aspect of enterprise architecture, and should not be deleted for lack of notability. Fram (talk) 08:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Looking over the refs it is clear that this could easily be expanded into a full article. Only problem that I see is that the original author didn't mark it as a stub. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Enterprise_architecture#Developing_an_Enterprise_Level_Architectural_Description. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:32, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 01:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 04:43, 24 June 2013 (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.