Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing: Difference between revisions

Line 7: Line 7:

==Computing==

<!– New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line –>

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:

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

Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage of the device in reliable sources. Mika1h (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The concept of associativity isomorphisms appears in the definitions of monoidal category and weak 2-category, but when defining them, it is necessary to explain not only associativity isomorphisms but also unit isomorphisms. Therefore, I think that articles that only explain associativity isomorphisms cannot meet WP:N. Also, in the Applications section the references is tagged as unreliable. Furthermore the phrase associativity isomorphism also appears in the braided monoidal category and the symmetric monoidal category, therefore this article cannot be merge into the monoidal category. SilverMatsu (talk) 00:55, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

This article has no citations, is a stub, and seems to fail WP:TOOSOON from what I can gather. External links appear to be mostly speculation. GrinningIodize (talk) 21:34, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Computer scientist and political candidate. No in-depth news coverage and no argument for notability. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 16:10, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Tennis, and Computing. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:27, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – fails basic verification. Bearian (talk) 01:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I searched on Google and I could not find a reliable source. To add to the confusion, there is at least one other Perry Gregg, (his son?) a tennis player. — 🌊PacificDepths (talk) 07:05, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. From the search, I couldn’t find anything out of ordinary covered about him only another Perry Gregg who is a tennis player and another Aircraft commander Lucius Perry Gregg, Jr. who was born on January 16, 1933 in Henderson, North Carolina. MichealKal (talk) 19:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:V — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxoug1 (talk • contribs) 11:58, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not notable for a standalone article, doesn’t cite any sources. Would be open to redirecting it to Device file#Pseudo-devices, which seems to me as a layman to be what this article is about, except nobody actually calls them ‘virtual devices’. JustARandomSquid (talk) 06:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Twinkle has informed me that someone has already tried to delete this in 2005 for a similar reason as me and failed due to a very large number of users insisting this was called a virtual device. The only source anybody cited at the time didn’t use it to mean the same thing as the article. If anyone can actually find any evidence of anyone calling UNIX pseudo-devices ‘virtual devices’, speak now or forever hold your peace, i guess. Also, I want to delete it because it’s not worthy of a standalone article, if the name was the only problem I’d just move it. JustARandomSquid (talk) 06:43, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’d just Redirect to Device file (without the section), which covers the same idea in plenty of detail across multiple OSs. It’s not the common term on Unix; if someone’s using this term then they’re more likely to be referring to another OS. Adam Sampson (talk) 22:08, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

WP:PROMO/possible WP:COI article on a cybersecurity specialist that jumped an AfC decline. Some sources (c1, c5, c8) are dead or possibly hallucinated (c1’s dead BBC URL doesn’t match other BBC News URLs). Article subject received a MBE along with dozens of others; not really a strong argument for notability on those grounds. Regarding a WP:BEFORE check, Worcester News covered her once and twice in promo/press-release language written by an author who writes with ChatGPT. In the former, the fellowship discussed is unnotable; in the latter, she is merely a finalist and not a winner. Would not be opposed to a WP:G11. /over.throws/^✎ 19:31, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TNT which is just an essay, not a policy or guideline but a good idea in this case. All 4 ISBNs are bogus. 4 of the refs don’t work — this looks like AI slop. We don’t know what to trust and what is wrong. Reliability is a must for Wikipedia and LLMs are not reliable — see WP:OR. Bad refs violate WP:V and may indicate potential bad faith (or cluelessness). —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have reviewed all ISB numbers and added the ones that are relevant, the last time I trust a language model…only problem is I noticed there was a duplicate reference to a book that Ventura had written. I cannot work out how to delete it, i tried to follow the instructions but could not work it out.

I also added two references to video footage which hopefully will pass even though it is on LVenturas own Youtube channel it is branded BBC and ITV news stations.

Kind regards

Earnest. Earnest1985 (talk) 15:32, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. Shellwood (talk) 20:26, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment She may have a forthcoming (2026) book from Kogan Page, but although Google Books and Amazon know about it, it’s not on the publisher’s web page. Odd. I’d hoped a publisher’s blurb about her as author might have contributed something useful. Fellow of Chartered Institute of Information Security …. their website doesn’t make clear how exclusive this is, no list or number of fellows, though it seems to demand some level of notability. She seems only to be a contributor to The Rise of the Cyber Women: Volume One, though vol 3 does seem to be edited by her and held in copyright libraries. I fixed its isbn. And of course if the article survives AfD it needs to be moved to Lisa Ventura, without the MBE! PamD 10:47, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pam, I found a link to Barnes and Noble for the Kogan Page book she is writing, hopefully that will work. I fixed the other three isbns. Earnest1985 (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also added links to the videos from her recent conversations on BBC and ITV News. Earnest1985 (talk) 21:52, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unreferenced bit of Windows trivia. I found a couple of short posts covering this (The Register, PC Perspective) based off a blog post by developer Raymond Chen. However this probably isn’t notable enough for an article. the wub “?!” 22:12, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. the wub “?!” 22:12, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I’d guess that webpages won’t be the best sources on this, since it’s a topic hailing from an earlier generation of computer technology. The Google Books search link finds enough mentions in books from the ’90s and ’00s (for example) to justify at least mentioning this icon collection somewhere and making a redirect. And JSTOR actually came up with a hit: If you don’t find anything you like, don’t despair. There is another file that contains more icons [1]. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 02:24, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I considered a redirect, but couldn’t think of a good target. Any suggestions? the wub “?!” 08:51, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 3.1, where it was introduced, perhaps? Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 17:37, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect– to Windows 3.0 I see would be a more suitable redirect based on its description.Lorraine Crane (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The post by Raymond Chen says it was introduced in version 3.1. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 20:42, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

I can barely find any coverage of this online to meet the WP:GNG. Searching “swtx supermicro” in Google and switching to the News tab gives zero results. Pretty much all the pages that appear in a normal search are just eBay, Amazon, and other online shopping listings. – numbermaniac 07:30, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Now, we have 3 different proposed target articles from participants. This needs to come to a consensus and settle on one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:12, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply