Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticisms of Mozilla Firefox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 Keep. Consensus seems clear here, article is not merely a POV fork but does have information not in the main article. Nothing stopping the nom from proposing a merge later. Aside: I like how the cleanup tags make a neat stylistic pyramid... but maybe they're not all needed any more. --++Lar: t/c 04:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Criticisms of Mozilla Firefox
A POV fork with more dispute tags than references. Cleanup, frankly, will probably never happen. Deltabeignet 22:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia:Original research. This is almost entirely unverified original claims. Those that can be sourced should be added (with citations) to Firefox. David L Rattigan 23:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. If something should be deleted its all the dispute tags. The article was almost completely rewritten since they where added. looks like adding dispute tags [1] is some kind of recreational sport by some die-hard FF users (i like this reasoning [2]). TheYmode 23:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep and cleanup, valid fork topic given the large size of the main Firefox article, however it needs more references. BryanG(talk) 07:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Not a POV fork, but a valid spilt-off article from the main Mozilla Firefox. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Per above. — RJH (talk) 18:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Needs some cleanup, more construtive references and some areas rewritten to conform with WP:NPOV. That said, it is a subject of great importance, notable and encylopedic.--Auger Martel 11:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Article is a lot better than the tags indicate, and covers the common criticisms of Firefox with equanimity and neutrality.Captainktainer * Talk 05:55, 19 June 2006 (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.
