Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relationship Approach to Systems Development: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:52, 15 July 2007

Revision as of 12:38, 18 February 2015

Line 10:

This is a very long article. I'm not sure quite what it's about, because it's rather thick with jargon, but my best guess is that it's an advertisement of some kind. As far as I can tell, it doesn't assert notability, and it lacks reliable sources. Prod removed by creator without comment. [[User:FisherQueen|FisherQueen]] ([[User talk:FisherQueen|Talk]]) 01:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' Not sure what it is, but it looks like [[WP:OR]] or a [[WP:HOWTO]] [[User:Corpx|Corpx]] 02:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

*'''Question''' On what do you base your opinion? RASD is a software RAD methodology used by many Fortune 500 companies. This is my first post. I may need help in writing the article, but the methodology is real. {{<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Itsme01|Itsme01}}]] ([[User talk:Itsme01|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Itsme01|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

::'''Answer''' (1) I cannot tell what this is, and the phrase 'software RAD methodology' doesn't mean anything to me. Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and articles need to be understandable to the layperson. (2) I cannot see any assertion that this software RAD methodology meets the [[WP:N|notability requirements]]. (3) There are no independent sources cited that would confirm the information. To avoid deletion, you would need to rewrite the article so that a general audience can understand it, explaining why this software RAD methodology is important, and providing sources - multiple sources independent of the company that have written about this software RAD methodology. -[[User:FisherQueen|FisherQueen]] ([[User talk:FisherQueen|Talk]]) 02:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

*'''Comment''' I just read the article, and I still have no idea what it's talking about. I'm guessing that this mightmeet the criteria for deletion simply because it seem to be a piece of copywritten trade-related promotional paraphernalia. Still, I'm not voting because I still don't really understand it. To make things easier for us, and simply because wikipedia is meant to be accessible to the general public, I ask that ''anyone who understands the article, please edit it accordingly, and if you can't be bothered to do that, at least tell us what on earth it's talking about''. [[User:Calgary|Calgary]] 02:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

*A link has been added to define a RAD. I will add additional links for clarity. Please click on the RAD, RUP, SDLC link for additional clarity. RASD is a software methodology useful for implementing package applications. If you were a software development professional, you would probably immediately understand its worth. Please refrain from deleting until the article can be fully posted over the next few days. It would be a disservice to the software community.{{<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Itsme01|Itsme01}}]] ([[User talk:Itsme01|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Itsme01|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:*Yes, that's part of my concern. I understand that some wikipedia articles af primarily of interest to certain groups, but I'm pretty sure that articles should be written in a style that makes the information accessible to wikipedia's diverse audience I mean, I have trouble reading articles about mathematical formulas, but in that case the article is usually well-written, and it's my fault because I'm not exceptional with math. This article, however, is long-winded and pedantic, and so heavily leaden with jargon that I'd be surprised if ''anyone'' other than a software development professional would understand it. I'm also concerned that the article is only of significance to a very specific group (the afforementioned software community). In any case, I've found the justification for deletion. The article makes no assertion of [[WP:NOTE|notability]], even within the software community. Even more to the point, it appears to be in pretty strong violation of [[WP:NOT#GUIDE]]. So I'm going to have to go with <s>'''DELETE'''</s> '''Strong Delete''' [[User:Calgary|Calgary]] 03:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' I have read the artical several times and i'm still not sure what it is. [[User:Oysterguitarist|Oyster]][[User talk:Oysterguitarist|'''guitarist''']] 02:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)