Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of finite-difference time-domain software

: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. MBisanz talk 03:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

=[[List of finite-difference time-domain software]]=

:{{la|List of finite-difference time-domain software}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_finite-difference_time-domain_software Stats])

:({{Find sources|List of finite-difference time-domain software}})

Wikipedia is not directory and not for random lists. List of warez which use a certain mathematical method is rather arbitrary, similar to List of songs about death. If a certain piece of software is notable, it mst have its own article or a section in the article about the math method. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

: Thus the creation of a list-class software article around a mathematical method is a reasonable enterprise; there is no grounds for deletion based on current Wikipedia practice and guidelines. The real question is whether any of the mentioned software programs in the list have articles themselves on Wikipedia or satisfy notability guidelines. If not, it seems reasonable to pare the list down to a stub. Mark viking (talk) 01:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:*? So what now, are we going to create a List of bubble-sort software? There must be an evidence of notability for such lists, unless we have articles about separate items. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

::* I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I was presenting evidence that creating such a list around a mathematical method didn't violate any Wikipedia guidelines that I knew of. MOS:LIST indicates that such lists should be lists of existing Wikipedia articles. I agree that if few or none of the FDTD programs listed have associated Wikipedia articles, there is no point in creating or retaining the list-class article. Mark viking (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Delete This is a list of things that don't exist in Wikipedia and is going to turn into a coatrack for non-notable software. We create lists to organize existing information in the encyclopedia; where there is no substantial information (only 8 4 blue links there) there is no need for a list. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:: WP:COATRACK is usually brought up when there is an issue of bias or undue weight. I'm curious--what do you see as the potential biases here? Thanks, Mark viking (talk) 03:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

:::Not coatrack in the strict sense, but rather a list of handy redlinks to create more articles about non-notable software. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 00:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 13:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑ScottywongUser talk:Scottywong 20:23, 9 January 2013 (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.