Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Computing. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Computing|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Computing. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Computing

Georg C. F. Greve

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

Tagged for notability for over 4 years, seems to have been (self?) created for promotional purposes. -- Beland (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SLUBStick

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

No indication of notability. Could be merged elsewhere. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 19:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Julian R. Day

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

I am unable to find any news articles or publications about Julian R. Day (though it was hard to filter out results for the Julian day). This is a similar situation to User:Allykmac's other article, Graeme Brosnan (AfD here).

Almost all the citations are primary sources, ie. company/conference bios written by Day himself; the sole secondary source, "How $115 led to over 200 court appearances", is a review of his book on someone's personal blog. I don't believe Julian Day meets notability requirements. Iiii I I I (talk) 06:29, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Computing, England, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I found a bit of local news-y coverage of his charitable initiatives, but it's pretty weak and I don't think any of it could be considered SIGCOV [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. I don't think he comes close to meeting WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR. MCE89 (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samsung SPH-i700

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

No indication of notability displayed since 2012. In addition, does not cite any sources. Could possibly be merged elsewhere. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 00:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This was all I could find [6], looks to be a press release. Nothing for notability, no sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 01:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Pocket PC devices#Samsung - mentioned in that list, I added the press release as a reference. --Mika1h (talk) 10:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~:Also found this CNET review: [7]~~ --Mika1h (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, it was for a different model. SGH not SPH. --Mika1h (talk) 10:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IREDES

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

Orphaned artcile without any verification of notability. Website is defunct, no evidence this is a notable standard, if even ever used. ZimZalaBim ^talk 16:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article is promotional in tone about a nonprofit, and has been unsourced since its 2008 creation. Search turns up no independent coverage of subject. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 17:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Business, Engineering, Computing, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Some coverage in Gscholar mining journals [8] or [9] were the first two I pulled up. Oaktree b (talk) 22:55, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This as well is about the "thing" [10] Oaktree b (talk) 22:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All seem like just passing mention, not any significant coverage or engagement. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 17:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:02, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't find significant coverage for this. It exists/existed, but fails WP:N. Angryapathy (talk) 16:09, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A search on Google news and Google scholar shows the standard is in use by multiple equipment and mining companies, and the website is live. It turns up in a mining glossary, and is mentioned in articles about mining robotics and smart mining. We have few articles about tools for data capture or analysis because it is hard to find independent in-depth information about them; even harder for a tool such as this used in industry rather than academics. It would not be an orphan if we had articles about some of the current modern methods in mining. StarryGrandma (talk) 06:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don’t keep articles on the basis of trivial mentions or appearances in directories. Please read WP: GNG. HyperAccelerated (talk) 05:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I found no WP:SIGCOV in any sources. Tgvarrt (talk) 22:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 02:42, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]