Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisp2dot (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 merge. I will redirect to Graphviz for now. W.marsh 20:00, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Was going to propose for deletion, but it has already been up for deletion once. Quite non-notable, and the 3 delete !voters on the former seems to agree. The 5 keepers !vote keep per first keeper Tony Sidaway's "Nice little tool." argument. See former AfD for more arguing. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 13:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, while only a guideline, not sure how this 'nice little tool' (note WP:ILIKEIT) meets WP:SOFTWARE or is notable in any sense. Besides the source code, where are any WP:RS for verifiability? The Rambling Man 13:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into S-expression. This is probably notable within a tiny domain, but it isnt universally notable, and the article wont grow much beyond its current size. Graphviz already contains a brief snippets about this tool, and that is all that the article could reasonably do, as this tool only creates DOT language files that can be used by Graphviz -- there is no direct relationship. Graphviz is extremely commonly used, so that article will eventually grow and list2dot would eventually become insignificant and more than likely eventually removed. OTOH, the S-expression is lacking in examples and even states that it hasnt been adopted widely. A long-winded explaination of this tool on that article would not be in danger of being dropped in favour of a better example. Unless the author himself comes here and tells us that this high ranking wikipedia article name is annoying him, I would prefer to keep a redirect from "lisp2dot" to the article where this info is moved to, as people will have bookmarks to this article as it has existed for 18 months. John Vandenberg 21:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Graphviz or DOT language. Merging this to S-expressions would make little sense in my opinion - kind of merging "William Shakespeare" to "English language", since the two are supposedly related. Anyway, there's no reason to keep this as a separate article; few bits and pieces that are part of the "unseen infrastructure" deserve such article, and are best discussed in some other article instead. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:16, 20 January 2007 (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.