Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of JavaScript-based source code editors
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Comparison of JavaScript-based source code editors (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was dePRODed in 2010 for being a "possibly valid combination article" -- however, this article consists of original research (in particular, it features a user's feature testing), and cleaning that up would amount to blanking the page. I'm not sure if this topic is notable, but even if it is, we'd need to WP: STARTOVER here. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. Owen× ☎ 16:38, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This is a muddle. (1) When you say "it features a user's feature testing" which user do you mean, and how did you determine the content was original research and not simply awaiting a supporting citation? Relevant diffs would be helpful. (2) The latest substantive addition ([1]) appears to be sourced. Is it not? How so? (3) The only editor you notified hasn't edited in over a decade. More productive I'd think to notify active editors who you say introduced WP:OR into the article, since that's your basis for your claim that the only alternative to deletion is blanking the page. If they disagree I'd like to know why. (4) You're "not sure this topic is notable"? Please explain then which of the other 13 reasons for deletion are germaine to this discussion, and how. Yappy2bhere (talk) 21:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)