Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puzzles in software testing

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 delete, G7 (One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page). The author agreed to deletion on the article's talk page. I am aware that closing an AfD in which I have commented would normally be unacceptable, but this case seems to me to be completely uncontroversial, and an IAR close seems the most straightforward way of finishing the issue. Anyone who disagrees is free to revert my closure. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Puzzles in software testing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

Fails general notability guideline, possibly self-promotion (only sources I can find are from a single author). Evil saltine (talk) 09:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete At present, the article contains no more than a definition, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Earlier versions contained a link concerning a person who has been the subject of much of the editing of the author of this article, indicating clearly that the purpose was promotion. Either way, the article comes nowhere near satisfying Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. I also see no reason to think that the subject "Puzzles in software testing" is notable: there can be puzzles in any sphere of human activity, and nothing I have seen suggests that there is any particular recognition of "Puzzles in software testing" as a topic in its own right. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:30, 15 May 2012 (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.