Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Software compatibility
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. Nearly all participants agree that the current content is a WP:OR essay. This deletion does not preclude a well-sourced rewrite of an article with this title. Sandstein (talk) 22:41, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Software compatibility
Removed prod as author objected, so I moved it here.
Seems to be too vague and nebulous to be an article.
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, nor is it a directory. Dougie WII (talk) 14:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, agree with nom. Article is unsourced, WP:OR. Could be merged to other relevant articles, but then again, shouldn't be, as it's unsourced OR. Cirt (talk) 15:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC).
- Keep with relevant cleanup tags. This has always been a major issue with software, so much that the topic does warrant a sepatate article. I agree, however, that the article in its current state is junk. --Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 15:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete unmaintainable as the main section is List of known incompatibilities, which is sure to start off a flamewar of people who disagree and calling each other r-tards. Too subjective, lends itself more to a dictionary than an encyclopedia. Pharmboy (talk) 16:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete unless someone can explain how this could become a useful article. Barrylb (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- First of all, the list of known incompatibilities is unmaintainable. That's a given. Let's scrap that one and give just a summary of notable incompatibilities, expansion of which should then be discouraged. Now, you ask, how can this article become useful? The article should state how compatibility is a major issue and a major pain in the ass for software developpers, and the measures they are taking to make sure they do not release software that contains bugs that are due to incompatibility with otherwise unrelated other products. Alpha testing, beta testing, even gamma testing, and all the other steps in-between. --Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 17:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - I really don't see a space where a useful article can exist here between a simple dictionary definition (Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary) and a totally unwieldy, unmaintainable article documenting each and every way software can be incompatible via Microprocessor, endianness, computer language, operating system, etc. differences on a myriad of esoteric technical varying levels. --- Dougie WII (talk) 17:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment How do you define "notable incompatibility"? Nothing but arguements could ever come of that section, regardless of how you try to limit it, and the net result would still be Original Research and fairly useless. As long as there is any list in the article, there is no way the article could stand. Pharmboy (talk) 14:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- First of all, the list of known incompatibilities is unmaintainable. That's a given. Let's scrap that one and give just a summary of notable incompatibilities, expansion of which should then be discouraged. Now, you ask, how can this article become useful? The article should state how compatibility is a major issue and a major pain in the ass for software developpers, and the measures they are taking to make sure they do not release software that contains bugs that are due to incompatibility with otherwise unrelated other products. Alpha testing, beta testing, even gamma testing, and all the other steps in-between. --Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 17:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Legitimate topic, with that being said needs to be completely rewritten. In its present form, article is vague and unclear. If this can't be expanded beyond a dictionary definition, then perhaps sending it to wiktionary might be the way to go. Mr Senseless (talk) 20:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete I was the original PRODder for this article. After discussing it with the original author, we concluded that the list is unwieldy, and any additions would probably be original research. I may be wrong, but in my experience, there aren't a great deal of sources discussing incompatibility. Besides that, as others have stated, the only compromise between a simple dictionary definition and an unmaintainable, unstable article, is an incomplete article without structure. Jame§ugrono 09:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I am the original author. I'd rather see this developed into something useful, and others who have a real knowledge of these matters contribute, rather than have the article abandoned. I am not sure that all of those who oppose keeping the article really understand the significance of many of the issues of which can arise because of incompatibilities in software systems. These can be a headache both for developers and end users. However they can also be used as a weapon by companies trying to gain a commercial advantage. I am trying to improve the article, and hope that others will pitch in. I will try to provide a reference for the comment about the replacement of the Fourier transform routines by DFT routines - I think it's probably due to Kuhn and Tooley, and will be documented in articles about numerical computation. In any case, it is indisputable that DFT routines work very much faster than the original methods which were used in the 1970s etc. I would be willing to work with others, such as BlanchardB, who also seems to believe that this is a significant topic for development. The comment by James Ugrono suggests that I agree with his proposal for deletion. I certainly do not. I do agree that maintaining a list of possibly incompatible software would be contentious, and should not be attempted. Whether it would ever be legitimate to have a short list of known major problem incompatibilities is something which could be left open, and not attempted now. David Martland (talk) 10:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I voted Delete above but I'm willing to give it a chance. If we were to proceed with an article, I would include mention of Forward compatibility. Include a section on how software compatibility is best achieved (eg standards, protocols). The competitive advantage is interesting angle. The language of the article will need to improve: statements like "Compatibility is really a major issue because..." aren't in the formal language required for an encyclopedia. I would like to know if there are any academic papers on the topic to help develop the article. Barrylb (talk) 11:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect. Essay. The text is free style narrative, the example is gross oversimplification, the section how one software library may replace another is completely off topic. The article doesn't mention techniques used to ensure compatibility (which are many and some quite sophisticated, ISO/ANSI/etc standards being one example). The topic is often covered in ACM and IEEE publications. I suggest to keep only one article (compatibility or incompatibility) based (or requested by some tags to be based) on on existing body of scholar research. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 12:10, 21 December 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.
