Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compute Area Network

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. Mailer Diablo 01:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compute Area Network

Protologism; I believe this is not a well-established term. The google test reveals only 4 hits, plus this page on wikipedia. Adding external links to 2 of those 4 hits doesn't change anything. The WP:NEO page indicates that "Articles on protologisms are almost always deleted as these articles are often created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term." -- Bovineone 15:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC) Bovineone 15:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Looks like a real term, but it's not widespread enough to warrant an article, and WP:NOT a vehicle for promoting term usage. Page can be recreated if term gains more traction. --Alan Au 17:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Retain (with possible rename?). As mentioned in the rejoiner on the discussion page, there are various similar phrases used to refer to the same concept such as Compute Resoure, Compute Layer, Compute Paradigm and Compute Pool. Put together these references total over 1,000 hits on Google. This article was an attempt to bring together what was essentially meant by each of these phrases under a single moniker. Would the Wikipedia community be more comfortable if the definition was renamed to e.g. Compute Resource (the most prevalent term in respect of Google hits) with cross-references to the related terms including Compute Area Network? --Jellyfish@lineone.net 19:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 17:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as a neologism. Took me a while to figure out that this is an extension of the SAN concept. -- Koffieyahoo 01:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Not related to SAN at all, compute area networks are about the dynamic allocation of processing and volitile memory LinaMishima 21:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that grid computing? At least the references in the article seem to present it as an extension of the SAN concept. -- Koffieyahoo 01:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hmmm, you may well be right! Looks like what I'm thinking of is technically a subset of grid computing, yes. This article is covering what is basically yet another buzzword for the same thing, then. LinaMishima 16:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete There is a better, more common term for this, but I can't remember what it is for the life of me :/ LinaMishima 21:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

• original research as CAN defines term for a new paradigm in relation to virtual computing. Current grid models apportion compute cycles/resource elastically to a single problem / defined set of problems across multiple physical nodes and interconnected software resources. The CAN concept avoids the multiple physical execution environment scheduling required by such concepts by dynamically creating appropriately sized software execution environments (SEEs) (i.e. single OS instances in a statically defined environment) and moving virtual images (files) between differently sized virtual 'physical' environments. The limits of the solution are the maximum sizes of virtual machines used in the hardware 'pool' used to create the CAN. Until this neologism is endorsed by community/industry players, it must, by wikipedia rules, be excluded. --Boiledfrog 23:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I represent TechTarget. This conflicts with CAN - See : http://www.canopendesign.com/ TechTarget 07:32, 02 August 2006 (UTC)

That might be a reason to disambiguate, but not to delete. Kfor 14:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

• Rename All of the above and in particular the last comment from TechTarget would seem to re-inforce my suggestion that the Term should be renamed to Compute Pool. To re-iterate my earlier comments whilst the phrase Compute Area Network in itself is a neologism/protologism, the concept it is trying to define is not. Under the aforementioned google test (apologies not sure of the syntax to allow AND Virtualization into the Google URL, Googlers will need to do this manually) searching for the Term Compute Resource and Virtualization returns many more hits than Compute Area Network, so again my comment to the Wiki community is would it be an acceptable option to rename as Compute Resource with the same definition?

• Comment Concerned from Edinburgh. Virtualization with an S or Z (Z...sigh....) is not a "real" word so any real words, acronyms, abbreviations etc are preferred in a Google society which dilutes the English language. Edinburgh 11:43, 02 August 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.