Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XMLmosaic
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 speedy deleted per G12 by Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs). Non-admin closure. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- XMLmosaic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This programming language fails to meet the general notability guideline. No coverage. Christopher Monsanto (talk) 23:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and discuss Nominator is on a spree, tagging many languages for deletion. While well-intentioned, this is a mistake. Rather than simply delete nascent, yet informative articles, we should be discussing this as a community. It may be true that these articles fail GNG, but that doesn't mean we should delete them. The goal here is to build an informative resource, not slavishly follow policy. If the policy is wrong, let's fix it. In the meantime, we need to stop this silliness. Nominator believes he's "cleaning up" Wikipedia, but the existence of these articles is a boon, not a bane. Throwaway85 (talk) 03:37, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep because nothing good ever comes of this type of spree. Ubernostrum (talk) 03:41, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete as copyvio of cited source http://xmlmosaic.codeplex.com/ --Pnm (talk) 04:51, 14 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.