Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Build It Fast And Fix It Later

: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. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

=[[Build It Fast And Fix It Later]]=

:{{la|Build It Fast And Fix It Later}} ([{{fullurl:Build It Fast And Fix It Later|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Build It Fast And Fix It Later}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Fullergalway is likely Robert Fuller, writing about his own personal philosophy. Even if not, it is original research with no verifiability. http://www.google.com/search?q="Build+It+Fast+And+Fix+It+Later" Habanero-tan (talk) 10:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Yes fullergalway is Robert Fuller, a reputable software engineer and currently Research Associate at Digital Enterprise Research Institute in Galway, Ireland. He has an undergraduate degree with focus on Philosophy from University of Waterloo, Canada and a Masters degree in Software Engineering from Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology. The article discusses a software development philosophy which has been in use over several decades and which is likely of interest to other software philosophers, designers and engineers.((talk) 11:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Cool, but as good as it is, there is a policy against writing your own ideas on Wikipedia: Wikipedia:No_original_research. We only accept ideas you get from other places, so it is easy for everyone to verify that it is correct. Habanero-tan (talk) 11:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete, with some regret. Software development "philosophies" seem to be as common as snowflakes in a blizzard, and they seem to be minimally differentiated, to put it mildly. This article at least has the virtue of being written in English, which is apparently a mighty achievement in the field. And being written in English, its obviousness is also apparent: the entire article is in some sense a restatement of the title, and no doubt this "philosophy" could be applied to fields outside software. It works well enough on Wikipedia itself. So my hat's off to Prof. Fuller, his article is better than 99% of the articles on such "philosophies", but it's still original research with no showing of current notability. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Presented as the idea of Robert Fuller, this doesn't make the grade and the title is not sufficiently distinct to be worth saving. The phrase in more use is just fix it later. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Unless reliable citations can be found in third party sources - in which case, I'd suggest fixing the article to include them sooner, rather than later. Otherwise it's just non-notable original research, I fear. Anaxial (talk) 13:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Topic is not the subject of independent reliable sources. Fails WP:V. -Atmoz (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2009 (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.