Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E3value
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Fram (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] E3value
This article has been speedily deleted twice to my knowledge. The phraseology seems to be selling the article. I'd personally think that a radical rewrite if the modelling language itself is notable rather than a delete, but as this has been deleted as advertising before I though a discussion rather than another speedy delete would be preferable. Drivenapart (talk) 15:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. The article reads, to a substantial degree, like an ad, so there is a serious WP:ADVERT issue here. Also, the article has no independent references to demonstrate notability per WP:N. Nsk92 (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Give me time :-)
Hello, I'm the author of this article and I agree that I'm a beginner in Wikipedia rules: the first version of my article was not neutral, as if I have nothing to do with e3value, it is just a subject of study for one of my courses. I've rewrited this article and now I really think it is neutral and clear, in the Wikipedia syntax. E3value is becoming more and more important in business modeling, it is not part of any companies, and the tool to develop it is free to use. I really think it has a place in Wikipedia. Please explain why you consider not before deleting it. I understand the miss of references and I'll add external references right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipo489 (talk • contribs) 15:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete, through process to establish a precendent. Entirely no notability shown for this non-consumer "ebusiness" product, and the article is rife with advertising style word salad. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Some changes
Hey people: I've tried to change a bit the synthax so that it suits the wikipedia way of thinking. Probably it is not enough but tell me what I should change next. I'll also want to add a graphical example, but I'm still not allowed to upload a picture. For the word salad, I've no schizophrenia, I'm just french :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipo489 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Changes. Hey everybody, I've added a graphical example (important for a graphical mod language :-) ) and independant sources. I am still waiting for further improvements depending of your comments. Of course, the english is probably not perfect (french use to have a bad english): I hope the community can correct the remaining syntax mistakes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipo489 (talk • contribs) 14:10, 18 May 2008 (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.
