Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relationship Approach to Systems Development: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 21:
*'''Delete''' The article is chock-full of gems like "''During the RASD Plan Phase an RASD Enterprise Application Architecture (EAA) blueprint is created. This mission critical blueprint is is necessary to ensure enterprise application design to include global functionality, regional usability and localized flexibility''" It's like something Dilbert's Pointy-Haired Boss character would write. If this is something that deserves an article, it sure as heck deserves a better one than this. Do people somewhere actually write things like this and keep a straight face? Another excerpt: "''Enable the implementer to more succesfully consolidate and/or replace legacy systems in a more orderly and logical fashion. Mitigate bugs and defects throught the incremental and iterative development build and/or deploy process.'' It's like the world's dullest magnetic poetry. [[User:Starblind|Andrew Lenahan]] - <b><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">St</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF5500">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF8000">bli</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FFC000">nd</FONT></b> 06:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' I've <s>slept through</s> attended many meetings and PowerPoint seminars where language like that was not only acceptable, but expected. Surprisingly, in context, much of it tends to make sense. But our article shouldn't regurgitate slide show language, no. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 06:10, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
:::I like how much of it can be rearranged without any noticable difference in meaning. For example, would the bit I quoted above mean something different if it said "''...global usability, regional flexibility, and localized functionality''"? Or any combination thereof? I'm sorta glad I don't understand this article at all. [[User:Starblind|Andrew Lenahan]] - <b><FONT COLOR="#FF0000">St</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF5500">ar</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FF8000">bli</FONT><FONT COLOR="#FFC000">nd</FONT></b> 22:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. This is the best example of marketese mumbo-jumbo I've read in a while. Articles in the English Wikipedia should really be in Standard English, and they should be about things whose notability is clear and verified with attribution to reliable sources. Edited to add: I am a writer. I am a ''professional'' writer. If I handed in an project that was written like this, I would be fired on the spot. --[[User:Charlene.fic|<font color="blue" face="Matisse ITC">Charlene</font>]] 06:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. 0 ghits, no sources, advert, not verifiable, original research, poor tone.-'''[[User:HisSpaceResearch|h i s]]''' <sup>''[[User talk:HisSpaceResearch|s p a c e]]''</sup> <sub>'''[[Special:Contributions/HisSpaceResearch|r e s e a r c h]]'''</sub> 10:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
| |||