Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dynamic cascading style sheets (2nd nomination)

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. No consensus to redirect. Daniel (talk) 22:26, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic cascading style sheets

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This term is obsolete; this term is not (and probably never was) notable; article has no sources and reads more like a guide Anton.bersh (talk) 16:55, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the main CSS article. Oaktree b (talk) 17:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (to add to the original proposal): This article might be a copyright violation. The whole "Example with PHP" section is a copy-paste from this guide in Dutch with comments removed:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100819062059/http://www.jori-koolstra.nl/DCSS/dcss.txt

Also, I encourage commenters to look at the first deletion discussion. It highlights some other problems with the article (which I did my best to fix). The first discussion was closed after a single "Keep" vote by User:SpinningSpark because "It [DCSS] may be a dumb idea, but it is found in the literature". I disagree with this logic because:

1. The mere fact that some word combination was committed to paper does not imply it is notable. For example, there are entire books about PHP6 but PHP6 (a language interpreter for which was never released) does not have a dedicated page.

2. PHP (or any other language) can produce text strings and return them as files, so you can "create" meaningless names like Dynamic XML, dynamic XLS, etc.

Anton.bersh (talk) 18:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Go Phightins! 16:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not a noteworthy topic, a term from a time when everything was described as dynamic. The last AfD pointed to some sources but only this one is about server side customization of CSS, the rest are about altering CSS client side (which this article is not about, not that it's noteworthy either). As Anton.bersh mentions, not every technology combination that's mentioned in literature is noteworthy. I don't think this should be a redirect to the main CSS page as this term wouldn't be mentioned on the main page. – Thjarkur (talk) 19:37, 13 March 2021 (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.