Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10th floor test
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Rossami (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 10th floor test
Delete. Zero relevant google hits (highly unlikely for a true IT-related term). Ergo, neologism. -- BD2412 talk 11:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete --Ryan Norton T | @ | C 11:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Don't Delete It is exactly because of the zero relevant google hits that I am creating this page.
I first heard it during a talk at the UKUUG Linux Technical Conference in Swansea by Thomas Lange. I contacted Thomas to ask wether it was his idea. Here's his feedback
> Hi Thomas,
> I've been googling etc but can't find anythin.
> Who actually coined the term "the 10th floor test" ?
I know it from Steve Traugott, www.infrastructures.org how did some talks on this topic.
The fact that it isn't a Higly common IT-related term YET should not be a reason for deletion.
--Kris.Buytaert Kris.Buytaert 2005-08-25 11:57:20 UTC (according to edit history. Uncle G 17:52:57, 2005-08-25 (UTC))
- Kris, Wikipedia is not a primary source. We only report known and documented information and everything needs to be referenced or at least be possible to verify someohow. Since this term is not yet in common usage, there's no reliable third party resources on the subject. - 131.211.210.10 13:27, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- This is an almost exact analogue of the Stephen Hawking example in Wikipedia:verifiability. Readers cannot verify something that is only mentioned in an unpublished electronic mail message whose very existence itself they only have a complete stranger's word for. If the conference has no record of proceedings that records the explanation of this concept, then it is unverifiable and does not belong here. Uncle G 17:52:57, 2005-08-25 (UTC)
- Delete The whole point of notability is that it excludes things that haven't happened yet. If someone created a 'computing infrastructure' article or even a Steve Traugott article, this might be merged. NN on its own though. Dlyons493 12:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Neologism. --GraemeL (talk) 12:28, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, any IT-related term that fails to return Google results is by definition not notable. - 131.211.210.10 13:27, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete neologism Tonywalton | Talk 13:37, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Dottore So 17:01, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete per Mgm. Andy Janata 00:03, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Anyone could as well introduce 11th floor test, 12th floor test,... Misza13 19:15:33, 2005-09-01 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
