Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of layout engines (CSS): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:20, 25 February 2007

Revision as of 10:14, 25 February 2007

Line 18:

:::#Third, even if an editor actually tested the CSS support of the browsers to resolve some conflicts (which would qualify as OR), this does not make the article in its entirey OR.

:::However, to be more practically address the concerns of this AfD, let me ask this: can the OR, RS, and [[WP:V]] issues be resolved? Is there really hopeless disagreement between multiple reliable sources (ignoring non-reliable sources)? If there is such hopeless disagreement, can the article be changed to reflect/discuss the areas where there is disagreement? If the answers to this are No, Yes, No with good reason, then I'll agree the article ought to be deleted. My "keep" comment was in response to your nomination that the article contained OR and lacked reliable sources as both of these problems are (usually) correctible, and also because the article is well-organized. If, however, the OR/RS issues cannot be resolved and portions of the article cannot be altered to reflect the existence of differing viewpoints in published sources, then I will support deletion. I know this is an awful lot to ask to be "convinced" to change my position, and I will completely understand if you choose not to go to all that trouble. However, in the end, my being convinced is not as important as determining whether the article is truly, inherently, and irreparably flawed, or whether it can be fixed/improved. Cheers, [[User:Black Falcon|Black Falcon]] 03:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' per nomination; In addition, Whilst I could see this would be a great resource for web developers if it was sourced, I don't see this as being able to follow the precedent of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of web browsers]] -- If someone is prepared to go and cite each case, then they should at least remove the sections for which the W3 hasn't at least got to 'Candidate Recommendation' status without a thumping great warning. I also don't think that browser proprietary extensions should be listed at all (all those starting with a '-'). -- [[User:Ratarsed|Ratarsed]] 10:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)