Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"Synchronous Future Internet"

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 Delete. GlassCobra 15:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Synchronous Future Internet" (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Paper on the 'future of the internet.' WP:NOT PAPER and probably WP:NOTFORUM. Delete Mr. Vernon (talk) 06:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Page has also been speedy deleted recently at "synchronous future Internet". -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 07:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, original research. If kept, move to remove the quotation marks. Stifle (talk) 11:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP:NOT PAPER is not an appropriate rationale as that relates to the argument that as Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia there is no limit to what it can cover. What I think the nom means, and certainly I mean, is that the article violates WP:NOR. Personal essay. In the extremely unlikely event this is kept, those quotation marks have to go. 23skidoo (talk) 14:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not an encyclopedia article, and I have a feeling the author's other creations Synchronous virtual pipe and Pipeline forwarding should be looked at. JuJube (talk) 01:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not an encyclopedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ErikTheBikeMan (talk • contribs) 21:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete wow... original research, WP:NOT PAPER, I hate to just spit out policies for reasons when it's been mentioned above, but it's pretty blatant. I don't think we'll be keeping this article either, but in the off chance it does, please remove those quotations from the title. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 07:49, 31 August 2008 (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.