Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ACK (___domain transfere)

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. A pointless, barely-parsable article. -Splash - tk 15:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ACK (___domain transfere)

This article seems to be about an abbreviated response that one Web ___domain registry operator can give to another when transferring a ___domain between registries. The article's very difficult to read and hasn't been significantly improved since that was first pointed out several months ago. There doesn't seem to be any reason why this term needs its own article. The article is also orphaned. Prod was removed two days ago with no discussion (the remover did add the article's introductory sentence, which I guess he thought cleared the whole thing up). If it was kept, it should presumably be moved to "ACK (___domain transfer)". Propaniac 16:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm abstaining on this one (in this case, there's very little chance of a WP:COI violation but my policy is to stay away from topics when a COI is even remotely possible). Hence, I will only say that both terms (ACK and NACK) are in common usage and relevant to a lot of users. Ack is obviously commonly used online and is probably obvious to most ~~users~~ native speakers but NACK may not be. I'm staying out of this but, if I may suggest so, instead of deleting the article, it might be appropriate to merge/integrate it into DNS. -- Seed 2.0 17:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The term (and its opposite, canonically NAK, albeit misspelled in the context of this article) is used in computing frequently, and the definition in this context is consistent with canonical usage. This article, in short, is rather redundant. --Dennisthe2 18:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be moved to "ACK (___domain transfer)" and it needs to be cleaned up a little, but it should not be deleted. According to ICANN's website, the negative of ACK is indeed spelled "NACK". The term NACK (spelled thusly) is very commonly used as a negative acknowledgement in computer science. As a data point, it's used 558 times total in these 33 RFC docs: RFC 527, RFC 937 RFC 937, RFC 2032, RFC 2357, RFC 2887, RFC 2961, RFC 3038, RFC 3048, RFC 3095, RFC 3269, RFC 3549, RFC 3684, RFC 3695, RFC 3816, RFC 3924, RFC 3940, RFC 3941, RFC 4046, RFC 4077, RFC 4164, RFC 4410, RFC 4465, RFC 4473, RFC 4535, RFC 4585, RFC 4586, RFC 4587, RFC 4588, RFC 4629, RFC 4654, RFC 4734, and RFC 4815. By contrast, the "NAK" spelling is used 1,144 times total in 124 RFC docs (I don't have enough free time to list all of them. By virtue of that data, I think it "NACK" should be treated as an official alternate spelling for the term. --Jonheese 21:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point there, I didn't realize that in re the spelling - I'm not only running off of the classic ASCII spelling, but from what I remember from the Jargon File. Certainly a redirect from the name you are referring to is sufficient, though? If anything, this would change my vote to a merge to ACK (computing). --Dennisthe2 06:23, 7 April 2007 (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.