- 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 of the debate was Merge. Rx StrangeLove 05:24, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I think we should keep this article. It's a unit of measuring time. It should not be merged with the Unununium operating system article. That would be like merging the article on the Unix operating system with the article on Unix Time. So in short we should keep the article.- Posted by User:BWF89
- Keep". Although the article is copied word for word from the website the website it copies from places all it's information into Public Domain so that shouldn't be a problem. Also, just because it's about some big operating system doesn't mean it's any less imprortant. I'm sure if MS WIndows had their own time system there wouldn't be any quetion on whether to kep that article. The goal of Wikipedia is to gather all human knoledge. (unsigned edit by User:67.163.250.244 - Dalbury (talk) 16:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC))[reply]
- Comment. I beg to differ with you: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. - Dalbury (talk) 16:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Small, unknown project, self-publicity Wclark 01:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Linuxbeak | Alex Schenck 01:50, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or possibly merge to Unununium (operating system) Dlyons493 Talk 02:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge with Unununium (operating system). There are many other articles on small and little known operating systems, which are quite valuable for study especially to people interested in operating system development. --Vishahu 02:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Unununium (operating system) and clean up. The text is virtually word-for-word from the Ununimium.org site [1]. - Dalbury (talk) 15:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as above and stop afd spam. Trollderella 16:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Unununium (operating system) and summarise. Proposed - "Unununium time is the time standard for the Unununium operating system. It's basis is the number of milliseconds since the start of its epoch - midnight (00:00), January 1st, 2000. See [2]". --Brendan Hide 17:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge as above. Brendan Hide's proposed text would be a good start, but the use of a 64-bit integer should also be mentioned, as this is a significant difference from the Unix standard. — Haeleth Talk 17:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ormerge per above. It's interesting, particularly if the bit about the difference from UTC caused by leap seeconds is both true and distinctive, as it implies. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 21:03, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]- Delete or Merge. We already have Year 2038 problem, Universal time, Terrestrial Time, Atomic Time, Sidereal time and this article doesn't add to that. Second, Un..ium isn't notable enough by far to warrant a whole slew of articles. squell 22:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. It has less to do with the Unununium (operating system) except that it has been developed by the same people. nevertheless it is a time measuring method which can be used by everyone and i don't see the reason why to merge it. --Pythagoras1 20:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Why would anyone use Un..time ? Running on TAI means the time will not match civil time, and besides that, computer systems don't run smooth enough to approximate TAI anyway. Starting in 2000 is also worse than starting in 1970 (means introducing negative timestamps for years past). Frankly, this entire Un..ium business sounds like a hoax to me. squell 16:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect as above. Worth maybe a sentence or two in the main Uuu article. MCB 22:25, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, cleanup valid topic. Grue 19:29, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. We should keep this article and it should not be merged with the Unununium operating system article. (This unsigned vote from 87.3.247.224 (talk · contribs) is the user's first edit.) - Dalbury [[User_talk:Dalbury|(talk)]] 00:50, 15 November 2005 (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.