Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underhanded C Contest
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 kept. Zetawoof(ΞΆ) 07:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Underhanded C Contest
Non-notable; contest appears to be defunct anyway. βPsychonaut 02:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- keep; verifiable, and coverage on slashdot (and other prominent web sources) makes it notable enough for me. β brighterorange (talk) 04:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Delete or verify within article --Roninbk 08:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Check back at its homepage; it seems to have reactivated itself by posting a set of results. (The International Obfuscated C Code Contest seems to be even more slow-moving, and I wouldn't suggest deleting that.) --ais523 12:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- I see no results. The page looks the same as when I made this VfD. βPsychonaut 21:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- It seems that there were previously two sites about it with the same content; one was updated with the results, and the other was linked from Wikipedia. I've changed the reference to the page with more info; you should be able to see the results now. --ais523 13:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- I still see no verification in this article. Nice that you found something on another webpage, but unless its in the article, what good is it? --Roninbk t c # 22:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- I have to confess that I don't quite understand what "verify within article" means. Can you explain what you mean by this? --Richard 04:55, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- I still see no verification in this article. Nice that you found something on another webpage, but unless its in the article, what good is it? --Roninbk t c # 22:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- It seems that there were previously two sites about it with the same content; one was updated with the results, and the other was linked from Wikipedia. I've changed the reference to the page with more info; you should be able to see the results now. --ais523 13:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- I see no results. The page looks the same as when I made this VfD. βPsychonaut 21:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, providing verifiability. - CNichols 15:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Keep contingent on verifiability per CNichols --Richard 08:32, 22 September 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.
