Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Network Topology and Application Analysis
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 13:59, 6 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 13:59, 6 February 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. –MuZemike 23:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Network Topology and Application Analysis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unreferenced new buzzword without a clear meaning. Searching around it seems to track back only to one Russian company that promotes related services. Tikiwont (talk) 22:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No coverage in reliable sources. Armbrust Talk Contribs 15:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - unclear what the actual topic is beyond some vague handwaving. No sources provided, and none could be found to establish this as notable. -- Whpq (talk) 16:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete we seem to be getting a great many of these systems engineering and management articles on catch-phrases with no or weak sourcing. I consider them all basically promotional, though it is not necessarily obvious exactly what they are promoting. I declined it as speedy because it did not seem to be promotional about anything specific, and prodded it, but the prod was removed. DGG ( talk ) 04:50, 14 October 2010 (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.