Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Off By One

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. I know that may look strange, but this is in fact exactly the same as the deleted Off By One (browser) article. I would call this a G4 speedy delete, except that this article apparently predates the other one. As it stands, I felt that since the same article was under discussion, I would consider the balance of comments in both debates, which clearly shows a significant consensus for deletion. Mangojuicetalk 04:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Off By One

Off By One (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

It is a duplicate of Off By One (browser), which was deleted (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Off By One (browser)) a little over a month ago with all votes in the AFD for delete. It also has no talk page. The last nom said, "OK, I am not entirely convinced about notability of this product. It seems to me to fail WP:SOFTWARE. In particular I do not see "multiple non-trivial published works", nor does it seem to be a "core product of a notable software developer or vendor". It seems to be a minor, experimental product, still in early stages of development. A browser that does not support CSS and JavaScript would be severely crippled and hardly suitable for real use, as the image of Wikipedia front page shows. On the other hand I may be entirely mistaken. It's for the Wikipedia community to decide." SakotGrimshine 21:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

  • KEEP THIS PAGE! I didn't realise there was a "(browser)" page - perhaps the disambiguation page wasn't doen correctly - this was where I have always gone for information on the off-by-one browser. Keep the page. WhiteHatLurker 01:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. A web search convinced me of its notability, but the nominator raises some important issues. YechielMan 22:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
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.