Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fluidtime

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete (anons discounted) · Katefan0^(scribble) 04:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fluidtime

• Delete - Advert -"Providing people with dynamic, personalised schedule information about public services and private appointments" (from the website) -Tεxτurε 20:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Dlyons493 Talk 02:24, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Advert. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:55, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete seems to be advert. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 00:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Unsigned anons

• Keep but cleanly describe that it is a company, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google 3 October 2005
• Keep but change wording as to announce what it is (a company) and what it does (providing people with....) 12:20, 30 September 2005
• Keep - the wording can be rephrased as much as needed, to better suit Wiki rules, but the service in itself is cool , works better and better, has been tested already in real life occasions like the Turin transport system in Italy, has a history, has been presented over Europe and US a few times already and has even been already mentioned or employed in various cross-pollinated interaction design projects presentations: it would be counterproductive and silly not to find a Wiki explanation.
• Keep but change wording! 30 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Fluidtime was an academic research project in Interaction Design Institute Ivrea, which examined how time is becoming more dynamic and personal as communication technologies advance. While I agree the sentence above is very close to advertisement, I would suggest we change the wording so that the entry can describe more about its core concepts. I think its concepts are interesting and worth keeping as a Wikipedia entry.

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.