Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion and merging of articles related to Computing. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Computing|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Computing. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing/archive

watch

Computing

Treams

Treams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to T-matrix method#Software: Fails WP:GNG; the independent sources (not written by Rockstuhl, who developed the software) that mention treams that I could access do not contain significant coverage of the software; they only briefly cite it or just note that it was used in their experiments. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Physics and Software. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:54, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Overall, I'm not completely sure, if it should stay here or be redirected. I wouldn’t probably mind moving the article to the T-matrix page, while keeping the detailed description of its capabilities, since for users these may be more important than the method itself. Posolubile (talk) 13:49, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

StankDawg

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/StankDawg
• Articles for deletion/StankDawg (2nd nomination)

StankDawg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does not provide evidence of meeting WP:NBIO (significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject) - citations are mostly self-published.

Also not seeing a strong case for WP:CREATIVE - his major works, including Binary Revolution Radio, Digital DawgPound, HackTV, and DocDroppers, don't seem to have significant independent secondary coverage. I put in this nomination a month ago, closed as delete: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital DawgPound (2nd nomination). It looks like the arguments in the first AfD for this article (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StankDawg) were mostly along the lines of WP:CREATIVE, including for his articles in 2600, but that work doesn't seem to meet the current criteria.

I searched for the person's name, handle, and project names in Google, Google Books, Google Scholar, Newspapers.com, and a basic Wikipedia Library EBSCO search, and did not find much. Brief coverage: 2004 opinion piece, page 271 in 2011 book, page 39 in another 2011 book. Dreamyshade (talk) 01:31, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People and Computing. Dreamyshade (talk) 01:31, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: this survived the first nomination in 2007, but that might have been under the lower standards of the era, and it has been tagged as a potential GNG failure since 2023. (No opinion.). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:23, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Internet, Florida, Kentucky, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:24, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
• Keep. I was involved with editing this article in 2006 (20 years ago!) and went through it again just now. I've expanded the list of works by both StankDawg and some Digital DawgPound members, added a 2011 standalone interview, and added information about his post-BinRev work, such as co-hosting the first episode of Hacker Public Radio. HPR's archives credit him with 18 episodes across HPR and its predecessor, Today with a Techie, through 2011. --Elonka 19:33, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Core Security Technologies

Core Security Technologies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I propose merging to Fortra because Fortra purchased CSS and rebranded it to Fortra. It doesn't need a separate article.

I am concerned that Fortra does not meet WP:ORG, as that article only summarizes the routine business activities and offerings of the company, but I am not pursuing deletion of that at this time. 331dot (talk) 11:38, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Technology, Computing, and Minnesota. 331dot (talk) 11:38, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 18:29, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Merge – I took a quick look at sources for Fortra to see if has any chance of prevailing as a standalone article, and I think it looks close to me i.e. it plausibly does meet WP:NCORP. Looks like Fortra has many acquisitions, and I agree that Core Security Technologies should likely live there. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 20:23, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment - I have a disclosed COI / personal relationship with individuals at Fortra, but thought it might be helpful to add this specific context here. There are a number of other existing articles about companies or former companies that are now part of Fortra, e.g. Globalscape, Clearswift, Linoma Software, Network Automation, TeamQuest Corporation, Tripwire (company), and Vera Security. It may be worth keeping the broader set of legacy entities in mind when considering whether consolidation into the parent article is appropriate, rather than treating Core Security as an isolated case. I don't mean to suggest that the existence or notability of those subjects contributes toward Fortra's notability; if there's interest in looking more broadly at the sourcing/notability of Fortra itself or the appropriate organization of the related articles, happy to take that to Talk:Fortra rather than derail here. Mrmctorso (talk) 02:05, 24 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:37, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Hug Your Mainframe Day

Hug Your Mainframe Day (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Couldn't find independent news coverage about it. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:48, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Popular culture, Technology, and Computing. BhikhariInformer‬ 📮 ^{(Ping me or else I won't see it)} 05:56, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

• Hi there, I did see you have flagged the Hug Your Mainframe Day event page for deletion.

  I am very happy to address any issues you have with it.

  But in all fairness, I've read the comments and the 2x issues that seem to be of consern to you personaly seem unfair.

  1. yes I created the page for a Mainframe community event I created, that seems very normal ;-) and of course I'm associated with the event of the page I created, it's a ad-hoc fun global community event I created just for fun, that has now become a global fun annual thing to "post selfies" of ourselves "hugging a mainframe" computer, and it's run for years now, so much so IBM incorporate it in their staff and community ( they make the Mainframe computers of course as you know I'm sure ).

  2. There is no scam or "attempt to scame money" despite the flag you created about that, I do not take money from anyone, and I am not asking anyone for money? I do not know why you flagged this as a scam or made a warning about "being asked for money"? there is a completely seperate ad-hoc thing where we invite people to make a charitable donation to feed homeless people, but that is completely unrelated other than like many events, as good human beings, we try to do charitable things to feed homeless people or something of good social value when we are part of events of any form - but that is completely seperate to the fun community event that is nothing more than random peers around the world in the Mainframe community posting photos of ourselves on social media "hugging a mainframe" just for fun ;-) the event now has an official website and there will be a button activated there that will go directly to "Street Smart Australia" where people can via that charity's website donate to feed homeless people, but I am not part of Street Smart Australia the charity, I merely support that charity, because every $10 donated to them helps feed a homeless person - nothing more - but if that is an issue for some reason for you, the I'll gladly have the webmaster delete that button but it would be sad as the hope is we as a community of Mainframers, can "feed some homeless people" while we once a year "hug mainframes" and post "photos of us doing it on social media" ;-)

  It would be horrible and unfair and indeed unreasonable to delete the event's wikipedia page because of two simple misunderstandings you have made based on assumptions when none of either are true or fair, there is no hidden agenda, I merely created the page to act as a Single Source of Truth about the event, and to support the now live official website, to help let the world know about it, and help document and capture the history of what it is all about, so we can get more people to take part and have fun, that's it, nothing more - wikipedia is full of thousands and thousands of similar events like "IBM Z Day" ( a 100% related event by IBM and Hug your Mainframe Day is now officially part of IBM Z Day just FYI ) and Systmes Admin Day or similar events - so this event, and the page I created for it in my spare time - they are exactly the same.

  So I dearly hope you will support us and not delete this page for an unfair or unreasonable reason as that would be sad.

  Thank you for your time, we hope you'll supoort us, not destroy us ;-) Dez blanchfield (talk) 08:39, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  @Dez blanchfield I respect that this is a fun project that you care about. But Wikipedia does not exist to promote things.

  As for the scam warning, sorry, that's boilerplate language included with the conflict of interest tag. The real point is that you as the creator of the thing have a conflict of interest with the thing (see WP:COI), which means the article might require cleanup. It's okay to have a conflict of interest, Wikipedia just wants it to be declared for the sake of transparency. You don't have to have a hidden agenda to have a conflict of interest.

  So to the core issue: notability. Just because we have other Wikipedia pages about similar days does not mean your day qualifies for a page. Whether a page qualifies is determined by the coverage a topic has received in secondary sources. So: can you provide me three news articles about hug a mainframe day? That would go a long ways towards keeping the article. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 09:21, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  hi again, thanks for making time to reply - I greatly appreciate it, I've had a wikipedia account for years and years and have added a few pages for open source projects over time, this is the first time I have considered creating a wiki page for a project such as this which is one of many many similar "community events" - so your guidance on how I can address your issues is appreciated - I'll gladly "jump through hoops" to resolve all the issues.

  this is no different to other events wikipedia already has such as the IBM Z and System Administrator annual events, so I only ask to have the same standing they enjoy, nothing more - so whatever they have that allows you not to delete them and the thousands of similar community events, I will match and better by doing the work so you don't feel you need to delete this event when you don't delete those identical community events that are already here, like Programers Day, Systems Admins Day, IBM Z Day - thousands are on wikipedia with nothing more official than Hug Your Mainframe Day, so whatever they have - I will get it and fix it ;-)

  becuase this is the first year I've setup an official website, and any formal messaging for it beyond posting things on Twitter, Facebook Business and LinkedIn to prompte it, I am still in the process of finalising the website, and getting a press release out about it via VoxNion.com - can you please not just delete us and give me some time to get a press release out about the event, and get some media coverage for it - that would be very helpful - I can find you many many places it's referenced and i you can give me a tiny bit of breathing room to get it out to media I am 110% sure I can quickly get back to you with as many media articles you want - I can get it up on the VoxNion.com public relations "News Page" in the next 24 hours easily - I can get an article up on the front page of Elnion.com in the next 24 hours as well - how many do you need to not delete us?

  here are some references that go back many years ( i.e. if you just "Google" the "Hug Your Mainframe Day" term you'll find thousands of posts across every single platform, including god awful tiktok even these days ;-)

  https://princessleia.com/journal/2025/11/some-of-the-gems-at-ibm-techxchange-2025/

  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pj-catalano_hugyourmainframeday-share-7503115855392661504-yySh/

  https://www.tiktok.com/@shanselman/video/7639809895897877774

  https://www.instagram.com/reels/DPP36MEDkGN/

  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/tine-seybold_today-is-hug-your-mainframe-day-i-was-share-7248966087944376321-xP5j/

  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pj-catalano_ibmtechxchange-hugyourmainframeday-ugcPost-7382010506758459392-RKOv/

  this is one of my original posts, in this case on twitter about it:

  https://x.com/dez_blanchfield/status/1443243802441895938

  you'll see Ros Mauri who was before retiring, one of the most senior IBM excutives running the Mainframe business unit, he and his peers engaging with all of this ;-)

  https://www.linkedin.com/posts/joewinchester_hugyourmainframeday-mainframe-ibm-share-7503509840850251776-ZE9E/

  here's a tool that shows massive activity around the event's hashtag which is #HugYourMainframeDay

  https://www.sotwe.com/hashtag/hugyourmainframeday

  if you can give me time to get a press release out, I'll quickly come back with links to newsrooms showing the press release etc.

  but please don't just delete us without time to at least get the same fair deal Systems Administrator Appreciation Dayt and the like gets - that woudl seem really harsh ;-( Dez blanchfield (talk) 09:37, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  I just got Gemini, Google's GPT, to help me and it gave me these three it thinks would meet the criteria, are these suitable?

  - - -

  To satisfy Wikipedia's guidelines, you need real URLs showing independent coverage or established technical commentary rather than standard social media posts.

  Here are three distinct, active links that can be used on Wikipedia to demonstrate independent references, corporate participation, and podcast discussions about the event:

  1. Independent Technical Discussion & Podcast Media

  Renowned tech evangelist and developer Scott Hanselman discussed the phenomenon explicitly on his media platforms, noting how the event dominates industry spaces and featuring insights from IBM Z leadership.

  • URL: Hanselminutes Tech Podcast & Media

  • Wikipedia Citeweb Format:

  Hanselman, Scott (2026-05-14). "Celebrate Hug Your Mainframe Day with IBM Z". Hanselminutes Media. Retrieved 2026-09-23.

  2. Corporate Tech Insights & Operational Analysis

  Global enterprise advisory and systems performance firm CPT Global published a corporate breakdown leveraging the holiday to analyze mainframe architecture optimization and system health.

  • URL: CPT Global Live Insight Article

  • Wikipedia Citation Format:

  Staff Writer (2025-10-07). "It's Hug Your Mainframe Day! Focusing on Future Health and Performance". CPT Global Insights. Retrieved 2026-09-23.

  3. Official Campaign Hub Archive

  The dedicated domain managed by the creators archives technical contributions, podcast transcripts, and community milestones.

  • URL: Official Hug Your Mainframe Day Hub

  • Wikipedia Citation Format:

  "Hug Your Mainframe Day Official Portal". Sociaall Inc. Network. 2026-09-21. Retrieved 2026-09-23. Dez blanchfield (talk) 09:41, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  hi CaptainEek, any input re. the above would be greatly appreacited ;-) Dez blanchfield (talk) 11:01, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  UPDATE: we have put out a Press Release and it is already published on the News Room of VoxNion.com and hopefully we can get it "picked up" by journlists in the next 24 hours to "run stories" about Hug Your Mainframe Day 2026 and I can get links to those as Media Sources to add to the page - I have already added the voxnion.com/newsroom link to the page as a 1st external media source, and am pushign assp to get 2x more at least per your request - please don't glete the page - give me a bit of time to remedy the media sources you requested to allow the page to say in place. thank you.. Dez blanchfield (talk) 14:00, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  UPDATE: we have just sourced an official media post by an IBM'er supporting the event last year via the following URL that is now also added as a 2nd media source / external source documenting the history and validitiy of the community event dating back to 2023 hopefully helping establish that this is a long running valuable community event for the global Mainframe users/admins/develoers et al (like myself): https://community.ibm.com/community/user/blogs/pj-catalano/2023/10/06/october-7th-is-hugyourmainframeday Dez blanchfield (talk) 14:24, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  UPDATE: a further media source has been added, and the page has been edited to remove potential self promotion or bias and language adjusted to clarify there is no money invovled directly but that it supports charitiable donations being made completely independantly directly to Street Smart Australia a charity which offers meals to feed homeless folk and those living rough on the streets - here is the link added to the References as a further ( 3rd so far ) external "media source" - https://princessleia.com/journal/2025/11/some-of-the-gems-at-ibm-techxchange-2025/ Dez blanchfield (talk) 14:51, 23 September 2026 (UTC) Dez blanchfield (talk) 14:54, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• For anyone confused, this is a copy-paste of almost the entire section regarding this on their talk page, which you'll see also includes some of CaptainEek's replies. AdoTang / talk 00:39, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete – Unfortunately, I'm not seeing any independent sources with significant coverage of this topic. The Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph mention is a blog post and only contains a brief mention in passing. If this event receives significant coverage in multiple reliable, published sources in the future, the page can be re-created. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 17:08, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, unfortunately. I don't think there's enough reporting in reliable, secondary sources yet. It is a cute idea.

SenshiSun (talk) 00:13, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Incredibly self-promotional and seems to mostly consist of a trend about taking a picture of yourself hugging a computer mainframe(...?), written by the guy who made it, with the intent of making it a thing via a Wikipedia article as opposed to it becoming enough of a thing to get an article, per the wording of what he pasted from his talk page above. Outside his own promotional postings and the social media and blog posts he linked, I can't find much genuine information about this outside LinkedIn and Facebook. Good luck with the charity stuff though, I guess. AdoTang / talk 00:39, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

  hello everyone, OK - I am now resigned to the reality that you will delete this page, I will take everyting you have graciously shared on board, and we will do this 2026 event and I will get Media Coverage of it and compile sufficient material and come back once I have "done my homework" as you have outilned, I guess at least now I have a better idea and what I need to do - thank you - I appreciate all yoru time and input - I will assume you will delete this today or tomorrow and go find all the posts and references / links to this wikipedia page and try to clean all that up and remove them so it doesn't look silly when people find you've deleted it.

  thank you for yoru time, and support, and kind words re. the project and the fund raising to feed hopefully 20,000+ homeless folk this year, that is all very kind and appreciated, hopefully not being able to use wikipedia as the "source of truth" about the project will nto impact us being able to achive that goal.

  I'll come back once I've got some bona fide media coverage and try again later, all the best, no hard feelings, natraully you'll have to appreciate I'm devastated but I do "get it" and "understand", such is life, thanks all the same anyway - hope to chat again soon.. Regards, ..dez/ ( @dez_blanchfield ) Dez blanchfield (talk) 02:23, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Tado°

Tado° (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, just WP:CORPTRIV and non-independent publications. Athanelar (talk) 01:35, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, and Germany. Athanelar (talk) 01:35, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Keep – I'm not an NCORP expert, but it looks to me like the sourcing is there in the German media e.g. Süddeutsche Zeitung and Die Welt.
  • von Heymann, Tobias. "Die jungen Problemlöser". DIE WELT (in German). Retrieved 2026-09-23.
  • Räth, Georg. "Tado: So will das Start-up vom Hype um Wärme profitieren". DIE WELT (in German). Retrieved 2026-09-23.
  • Paukner, Pascal (2014-11-30). "Ganz schön warm hier". Süddeutsche Zeitung (in German). Retrieved 2026-09-23.

Also some of the usual in places like WP:TECHCRUNCH e.g. . Also seeing a lot of German product reviews of Tado products, so could maybe be re-scoped to meet WP:NPRODUCT and focus on their smart thermostat product lines. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 19:33, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

I just took a look at the article, and I see it's almost all PROMO. If kept, needs to be reduced to a stub. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 19:35, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

@Suriname0

1. Based on interviews with the founders of the companies it covers; so it's not independent and can't be used to substantiate notability.

2. Ditto, full of quotes from the company's founder.

3. Ditto here. I'd bet all of these pieces were produced as part of the same marketing push by Tado.

As for TECHCRUNCH; like that link says, their articles often have too little independent analysis to satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH so that's out the window. But looking at those 3 pieces anyway, the first is plain WP:CORPTRIV covering a funding round, so's the second, so's the third.

Whether there might be material for a separate article about their products is kind of irrelevant. There still seems to be no indication here of WP:CORPDEPTH-compliant sources for this article. Athanelar (talk) 20:40, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Codar Africa

Codar Africa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

LLM-generated WP:ADMASQ for a Nigerian company that fails WP:NCORP. Sources are basically lightly rewritten press releases (, , ) or literal paid placement (). A BEFORE search turns up only WP:CORPTRIV of similar (lack of) independence. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Technology, Suspected AI-generated articles, and Nigeria. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Artificial intelligence, Computing, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:13, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

The page looks good and is properly citated ~2026-50938-32 (talk) 08:46, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete – Seems likely LLM-generated (see original diff). Independently of the current content, the coverage in The Guardian seems okay, but I don't see sufficient coverage to meet WP:NCORP. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 20:41, 23 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOLLM. Indications of LLM use (from the original article version) include canned emphasis on media coverage ("The Guardian Nigeria reported", "Vanguard Nigeria also reported ", "The Guardian Nigeria described the company's efforts"), avoidance of basic copulatives ("is"/"are" phrases), and superficial summarization of sources ("An academic publication examining technology training and digital-skills development in Nigeria also identifies Codar Tech Africa as a technology-training organization operating in Lagos.", "The report described CODAR as an artificial-intelligence-focused educational technology company and discussed its practical approach to technology training."). Vegantics (talk) 19:46, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

Child Care Management System

Child Care Management System (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Out of the 7 google news hits, only the 1st one refers to this Australian system. It seems the same term is used in the USA. Fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 23:27, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Management, Computing, and Australia. LibStar (talk) 23:27, 20 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Social science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:02, 21 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. The article lacks sufficient independent, reliable sources providing significant coverage of the subject. Most of the available material is routine or primary-source information, so it does not meet WP:GNG.--Leuvraethi mer Dorus (talk) 08:32, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Software transactional memory

Software transactional memory (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Performing the second AfD step on behalf of a temporary account as requested at WT:AFD § Request for AfD nomination for merging for Software transactional memory. I have no opinion on the actual proposal and won't watch this discussion.

Merge into Transactional memory There is significant overlap in topic between this page and transactional memory, as well as in content. I propose merging this page into there as that page's title is more general and would be a better location to include this page's content. ~2026-50637-96 (talk) 00:19, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

FaviFake (talk) 15:21, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:02, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Reflection (C++)

Reflection (C++) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

the only secondary source discussing it, wholetomato, seems to be a self-published blog. doesn't appear to be notable. 1brianm7 (talk) 22:35, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:53, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep. The page presents what it claims to present and does so at sufficient detail. Sources covering it seem equivalent (if not at a much higher count) than other related topics, including Algorithm (C++), Functional (C++), Sequence container (C++), Associative containers (C++), Unordered associative containers (C++), and several other pages present on the Template:C++ Standard Library template; singling this page out is inconsistent. ~2026-50637-96 (talk) 00:11, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I singled this out because I came across it when reviewing new articles. Those articles are literally two decades old, and would likely be deleted if an AfD was opened. 1brianm7 (talk) 00:29, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Do see WP:SSE, and in particular the sentence

In categories of items with a finite number of entries where most are notable, it serves no useful purpose to endlessly argue over the notability of a minority of these items.

The core features of the C++ language are a finite, bounded set. Additionally, the claim that the only secondary source discussing it" is a self-published blog, is untrue; sources from GCC, Clang and JetBrains are included (although the JetBrains source is a "blog", it is an official outlet of the company and its product news and I thus think it is valid for inclusion). I would finally like to add that citing individuals' words, such as Herb Sutter's, although they are directly involved with C++'s development, are not primary sources as those words are not "official statements".

I additionally object to your comment that older articles survived simply because they went unnoticed for two decades; Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer science actively monitors these categories and are actively involved with page editing there, too; these exist because their content are encyclopedic, not because they were apparently forgotten about. ~2026-50637-96 (talk) 00:52, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

The standard that determines whether something should have a Wikipedia articles states the requirement that it has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." I don't doubt that many of the sources used are reliable for what they say. But a company or group saying that you can use something in their product is not independent. Its a bit unclear whether Herb Sutter is independent of C++ to count as a reliable source, but if so I would describe his source as definitely the best (he is certainly a self-published subject-matter expert). Wikipedia articles require significant coverage in sources. So, what do people who have nothing to do with Reflection think about it Reflection. Is it an elegant and innovative solution? Is it simple? Does the history of its development leave any guidance or warnings? That is what a Wikipedia article requires so it is not something Wikipedia is not.

I care little for computer science. I came across this article because it was in the WP:New Pages Patrol backlog, which is way too long. Bad stuff is happening because it is too long. So, when I came to this page, my sole purpose was to remove it from the backlog. Either by finding that it has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", or not, in which case I do this. Those pages aren't in the backlog. They were made two decades ago. If they are non-notable, then they are doing much less harm than this was by staying in the backlog. Nobody has edited Algorithm (C++) in a year, and its not exactly a WP:Featured article. The last discussion of C++ at WP:CS was started 368 days ago, so not exactly "actively". Nobody is going around to those articles and going "Are you presently in a backlog that is too long and who's existence is causing problems", because they're not in such a backlog. 1brianm7 (talk) 02:35, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

I will add for the record, that I have added additional sources found on Google Scholar that discuss C++26 reflection. ~2026-50637-96 (talk) 20:52, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep and tag for issues. I accepted this at AfC because it is a plainly notable subject, as one of the core and well documented features of an extremely notable and well documented programming language. The only other real option is to merge and redirect into either Reflective programming or C (programming language), both of which would be too long. AfD is not cleanup. guninvalid (talk) 01:45, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

I do not see how this subject is yet notable. That is why I nominated it for deletion. Not because of any problems with the article itself, besides its lack of notability. 1brianm7 (talk) 18:22, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Please see WP:BLUDGEON, and in particular the line

It is not your responsibility to point out every flaw in everyone's comments. If their opinion is so obviously flawed, give other readers the benefit of the doubt in figuring that out on their own.

~2026-50637-96 (talk) 20:18, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. The C++ 26 standard is very new and it is just now getting into software releases, programming books, and articles. See the 2026 version of C++ for Dummies, page 380-382 and this case study which considers (ahead of release) whether it will be useful for their project. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:10, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Dunstan Guba

Dunstan Guba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ghanaian cybersecurity expert (BLP). The sources are a routine bio, a few brief mentions, and a primary source (news coverage of a medal he received). I see no evidence of sustained coverage in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject, as required for WP:BASIC. Dionysodorus (talk) 23:18, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, and Ghana. I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 03:28, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. I recently contributed to the article, but I have no personal, professional, financial, family, or organisational connection with the subject and have not been paid or asked to edit it.

I found two national-news reports that provide more than passing mentions. MyJoyOnline's “Ghanaian Policeman secures podium finish at global INTERPOL cyber warfare competition” (31 May 2025) focuses on Guba and discusses his performance and related work. GBC Ghana's “Ghana Cyber Expert Warns Africa: Ransomware Now Targets Trust, Not Just Money” (31 December 2025) provides substantial coverage of his cybersecurity work and presentation. These are separate national media organisations covering different events.

I agree that the Council of Europe speaker biography, institutional pages, event programmes, and police-release-derived reporting should not independently establish notability. However, I believe the MyJoyOnline and GBC coverage, considered together, provides a plausible basis under WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. CindyPlus (talk) 15:41, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• Delete - The article (most likely) fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC; significant coverage from multiple reliable sources is required to establish notability. I did search for sources on my own and found nothing. It is possible that someone else will find sources (remember WP:NEXIST), but as of now I would advocate for deletion. WikipediholicRat (talk) 00:05, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep: The issues raised are not consistent with the policies guiding our operations on wikipedia. The issue raised by the nomination are not factual; stating that the sources are a 'routine bio, a few brief mentions, and a primary source (news coverage of a medal he received)'.

The article is built on independent sources which comply with WP:NBASIC; sources from Ghana Broadcasting Corporation, Joy FM (Ghana), Business and Financial Times, and Ghana News Agency. These are secondary sources, not institutional bios or press releases. The coverage, taken together, is not “routine” or “a few brief mentions.” Multiple independent reliable secondary sources have discussed Guba's professional contributions and competitive achievement in non-trivial detail. This satisfies the WP:BASIC WP:GNG threshold for significant coverage.

Similar biography on Wikipedia are Albert Antwi-Boasiako, Julius Robinson, Divine Selase Agbeti, David Asante-Apeatu, and Obadare Peter Adewale

The nomination for deletion only underestimates the independence and depth of available sources. The sort of coverage Wikipedia typically accepts for law enforcement and cybersecurity professionals from developing countries is international competitive success in a specialised INTERPOL digital-security challenge, national media reporting of that success, and subsequent contributions from experts.

Guba’s documented roles (Cyber Intelligence Lead, inter-agency work with INTERPOL/FBI/Meta, lecturing, national TV programme, and the INTERPOL competitive result) sit comfortably within the same range of specialized professional achievement and independent secondary coverage that has supported those articles.

Additionally,

• WP:NEXIST Sources do exist, and have been found, the article can be expanded and better referenced, rather than deleted.
• WP:BEFORE This is a biography of a living person that needs to be improved to use a neutral tone, better sources, and remove any promotional language. No deletion is needed when coverage is sufficient. Uprising Man (talk)

• Delete The article subject fails to meet fails to meet WP:GNG. No significant reliable third coverage also exists. And Dunstan Guba is not a similar profile to Albert Antwi-Boasiako, Divine Selase Agbeti or David Asante-Apeau. The scale of rank is very different. Guba’s rank within the Ghana police is that of a middle level police officer at best. Ataavi (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hochulization

Hochulization (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NEOLOGISM0 Kqol • talk 21:30, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. The article is not dedicated to a neologism. It is dedicated to a current technique bearing social and political significance. Бялхляб (talk) 11:18, 17 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:25, 18 September 2026 (UTC)
• Бялхляб is right that the article appears to be about a technique, not the name for it. That being said, I don't think the technique passes WP:GNG - The Verge seems to be the only reliable source covering it nontrivially. Merge to 3D-printed firearm#United States, where there is already discussion of regulations by state. While generally applicable, this technique appears to only be discussed in the firearms context. ~ A412 ^talk! 00:34, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
  • The New York law that the technique is a response to has better coverage, and this is best framed in that context: , , . ~ A412 ^talk! 00:52, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - we are not Urban Dictionary. This is lacking any good sources. I don't think The Verge is a reliable source for this topic. Because it's a direct reference to a living person, WP:BLP is implicated; the burden of proof rests with the proponents of the page. The sources proferred are about the law, not the alleged computer program that is the subject of this page. Bearian (talk) 11:02, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

  Bearian, why would WP:THEVERGE, which by consensus is "a reliable source for use in articles relating to technology, science, and automobiles", be unreliable for 3D printing, which surely falls under technology and science? ~ A412 ^talk! 15:52, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Merge to DEFCAD: This has only been discussed in the context of DEFCAD and Cody Wilson for now. It would be slightly undue to merge this information to a broader article such as 3D-printed firearm (that would be my third-choice merge target after DEFCAD and Cody Wilson). Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:56, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:20, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

WDC 65C21

WDC 65C21 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I propose redirecting these five Western Design Center products because I was unable to find independent WP:SIGCOV for any of them. Of the 9 products listed on the WDC page, 4 seem clearly notable and these 5 seem clearly not notable to me.

This bundled nomination includes the following related articles:

WDC 65C265 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

WDC 65C22 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

WDC 65C51 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

WDC 65C134 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Note the articles were originally created by a representative of the company. I would have WP:BLARed these myself, but since it's five articles and not one I wanted to nominate this for additional editor eyes. Thanks, Suriname0 (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Technology, and Computing. Suriname0 (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2026 (UTC)
• Comment I'd suggest instead merging WDC 65C22 into MOS Technology 6522, and WDC 65C51 into MOS Technology 6551. In both of those cases, the WDC chip is a second-source for the MOS original, and the functionality is described on the MOS page; the MOS chips do appear to be notable as they're described in depth in multiple books about programming the 80s computers that used them. (The 65C21 is similarly a second-source 6821, but we don't have a page about the 6821, which was rather less popular than the 6522/6551...) Adam Sampson (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

  This is a good suggestion. No opposition to this revised plan. Suriname0 (talk) 20:45, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

IQM Quantum Computers

IQM Quantum Computers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable company; fails WP:NCORP. Sources are WP:CORPTRIV about capital raises (, , , , , , , , ) a press release (), an affiliated source (), and a trivial mention (). I don't see anything else qualifying in my BEFORE search.

There's also a nonexistent and never-archived link that may indicate the involvement of LLMs in creating this article. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Computing, Suspected AI-generated articles, and Finland. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2026 (UTC)
• Draftify or Keep. I agree with the nominator's assessment here. None of the sources individually are significant coverage, and the sources considered together do not constitute significant coverage. That said, I think this company is significant - from a brief search, I found this article from business wire (unsure if we consider it reliable for these matters) that says this company is the First European Quantum Computing Company Listed on a Major U.S. Exchange. Improvements need to be made, but I think that it is significant enough for inclusion! Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 15:44, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

  BusinessWire is a press release service; that is a press release from the company itself. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:59, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment. Here are two sources which pass WP:CORPDEPTH:

• Here is a ~950 word article in HS, Finland's largest subscription newspaper.
• Here is a ~1200 word investment-analysis article from Tekniikka & Talous.

Both articles contain independent analysis rather than simply restating company announcements. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:56, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep. While the company is in the initial stages, such is the case for most quantum computing companies that are not Google or IBM or Microsoft's quantum branches. Having a PhD in quantum technologies myself, and having attended quantum engineering conferences recently where the number of mentions of IQM quantum computing was very many (tens if not a hundred). Comparing to contemporaneous QC companies such as Quantinuum (founded 2021) and IonQ (founded 2015), IQM Quantum Computers was founded in 2018. The other companies have extensive articles already. So the spirit here should be to improve this IQM article instead of deleting it. It is indeed a pioneer of the European QC company ecosystem. To support my case, I put more secondary sources that satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH and are not authored by the CEO or co-founder of the company (some initial sources in the article were indeed press releases by IQM)

• Here
• Here

Quantumavik (talk) 22:37, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Other companies exist is not an argument for keeping. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:38, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep – Per the sources identified by Jähmefyysikko. (And edit to reduce the PROMO present in the current article.) Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Between the churnalism sourcing and the argumentum ad verecundiam, I don't see a strong case for retention presented here. Could HighKing or some of our other resident NCORP source reviewers please chime in?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 18:59, 24 September 2026 (UTC)

• Dratify. I found additional sources such as and there are probably more

https://www.eib.org/en/projects/all/20210429

https://www.weforum.org/organizations/iqm-quantum-computers/

https://www.ourcrowd.com/companies/iqm

As stated above, in its current state doesn't do a good job of substantiating notability. This needs to be improved PlainJane91 (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Actor model and process calculi history

Actor model and process calculi history (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pretty clear violation of WP:ESSAY and WP:SYNTH. Very sparsely-referenced article that attempts to link two distinct computing theories. Was found through the AI Cleanup Wikiproject, although personally I don't think the article is AI-generated. Rather, it's just an essay with lots of bullet points and boldcase for emphasis. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:15, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics and Computing. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:15, 13 September 2026 (UTC)
• Delete as WP:SYNTH (and, since the original author in 2008 was Hewitt, a dose of WP:PROMO too). It appears to be a split off another article that was itself taken over to Wikibooks. LLM use is not a concern, since the page has hardly changed since January 2022. This is human-made inappropriate writing. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 13:56, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 22:55, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Simon Willison

Simon Willison (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article does not clearly demonstrate that the subject satisfies the general notability guideline or the applicable biographical notability guideline. Most of the references currently cited establish particular employment positions, projects, organizational roles, or announcements, rather than providing significant independent secondary coverage of Simon Willison as a subject in his own right. Several sources are also primary or affiliated with the subject or the organizations discussed. ~2026-48104-83 (talk) 02:48, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment - Completing nomination on behalf of TA -- above text is copied from article talk page. I have no opinion of my own at this time. --Finngall ^talk 21:14, 7 September 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:NCREATIVE#2, The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique, as he is one of the cocreators of the Django (web framework). Kelob2678 (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

  Even if this were true, he still fails the criteria needed in WP:NBASIC. Being famous as the co-creator of Django falls under the rule WP:SINGLEEVENT, and at best should redirect to that article instead. ~2026-50291-58 (talk) 15:40, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

  NCREATIVE is an SNG, which is an independent path to notability from GNG. The guideline says that one technique is enough, otherwise it would have said "for originating multiple significant new concepts, theories or techniques". Kelob2678 (talk) 15:46, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

  The SNG for people states that if a person meets additional criteria (in this case, WP:NCREATIVE) but fails the basic criteria (WP:NBASIC), then the contents of that article should be merged into another article.

  See also: WP:BIOSPECIAL, which is a guide for people who meet the additional criteria of SNG (People) but fails the basic criteria. ~2026-50291-58 (talk) 16:54, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

  BIOSPECIAL also talks about "a satisfying explanation", and I think here we have one. Merging his biography to Django will not provide additional context that helps readers to understand him better. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:41, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Internet, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:45, 8 September 2026 (UTC)
• Week Keep – It's difficult to search for sources because Willison is mentioned so much in so many outlets over such a long period of time (which itself is a signal of some kind...). I'm not seeing the kinds of slam-dunk coverage to trivially meet GNG (e.g. profiles in high-profile non-tech publications), but I see sufficient discussion of Willison and his work to justify keeping this page. He is used regularly as a source, sometimes as a passing mention and sometimes with a few sentences about his work. Business Insider , Ars Technica , the New York Times , VentureBeat , WIRED . (Some nice interviews e.g. from The Register , which doesn't count toward notability.) I'm going to stop my search there, but I suspect others may be able to identify more substantial coverage, including from way back in the Django days (he has a lot of mentions in old print materials on the Internet Archive that I didn't look at carefully). Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 23:45, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

  Here is my take on these sources:

• |-

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
"'AI-pilled' engineers are working harder and burning out faster, Django co-creator says". Business Insider.		WP:BUSINESSINSIDER	~ Only on his anecdote on AI agents	? Unknown
"Simon Willison says the 'dark factory' is the next big thing in AI". Business Insider.		WP:BUSINESSINSIDER		? Unknown
"AI agents now have their own Reddit-style social network, and it's getting weird fast". Ars Technica.		This author is unreliable, because he is known for using AI tools in his reporting and was later fired from Ars Technica for writing an article with fabricated AI-generated quotes.	Passing mention only	✘ No
"Will the future of software development run on vibes?". Ars Technica.		Same reason as above		✘ No
"Twitter pranksters derail GPT-3 bot with newly discovered "prompt injection" hack". Ars Technica.		Same reason as above		✘ No
"OpenClaw proves agentic AI works. It also proves your security model doesn't. 180,000 developers just made that your problem". Venture Beat.		WP:VENTUREBEAT	Passing mention only	✘ No
"Firefox Users Monkey With the Web".			~ Only about his program (which is unnamed in the article)	? Unknown
"Simon Willison interview: AI software still needs the human touch".	Wikipedia:Interviews#Notability			✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

• It appears that at best these sources can be used for some anecdotes, but nothing significant. I will note that the term dark factory has been made long before the Business Insider article came out. ~2026-50291-58 (talk) 16:39, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further anaylsis/confirmation of the sources brought forward by Suriname0 will be useful in firmly establishing notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:28, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 06:37, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

River (software)

River (software) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. All sources in the article are primary or user-generated. (e.g. Arch Wiki, Codeberg) I also did a quick search and found only . ~ rusty ^meow ~ 14:21, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. ~ rusty ^meow ~ 14:21, 4 September 2026 (UTC)
• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Software-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:44, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

*Delete Non-notable software that doesn't appear to pass WP:NPRODUCT. Agnieszka653 (talk) 02:08, 11 September 2026 (UTC) —  Blocked sockpuppet of PapaTakaro, see investigation.

• Keep Found the second source from LinuxUser magazine. Kelob2678 (talk) 19:23, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 21:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to Wayland (protocol)#Wayland compositors. There's not a lot of meat here to justify a standalone article. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
• Keep: The source provided by @Kelob2678 justifies it. Farhanansari1994 (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2026 (UTC)
• Merge to Wayland (protocol)#Wayland compositors. Even with the LinuxUser source, I don't think it meets WP:NPRODUCT. The useful information can be covered in the Wayland compositor section. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2026 (UTC)
• Weak keep otherwise merge per the above.

IndrasBet (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per Kelob2678, the presence of coverage in LinuxUser establishes sufficient under WP:GNG and WP:SOFTWARE. Staticspector (talk) 23:57, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:42, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

• Merge to Wayland (protocol)#Wayland compositors. The sources are extremely limited. A report of a presentation at FOSDEM (Free and Open Source Software Developers’ European Meeting) and a very short description of a test in Linux User. GNG says "there is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." These two are insufficient (and this should also be meeting WP:NPRODUCT). Further, we must consider WP:PAGEDECIDE. As we have so little to say about this product, this is better contecualised on the proposed merge target. Everything we say can be covered there, and if better sources emerge, the subject can be spun out at that point. I know deletion is not for clean up, but we do not serve readers well by linking people to a page of further information, where the page contains no further information. A merge is not deletion. A merge is an editorial decision to cover the information on a relevant page that contextualises the information. That is appropriate in this case. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 05:55, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

  This is an open-source project, so while it is a product, it is not the kind of content for which WP:NPRODUCT was written. LinuxUser contains roughly 2,000 words on the subject, most of this is basically a manual, but this kind of coverage is not excluded when assessing notability. The length of content devoted to individual compositors at the target is a few sentences at best, here, we already have more and the article can be expanded. Kelob2678 (talk) 07:20, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Sinsy

Sinsy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: This formal merge proposal was incorrectly opened on the article's talk page. Following the March 2026 RfC, formal merge discussions are now held at AfD rather than the historical Proposed article mergers process (PAM). I've moved the discussion accordingly per WP:TPO.

Moved from Talk:Sinsy § Proposed merge

 – FaviFake (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Proposed merge

This article has only three sources to demonstrate notability, and is nothing more than a description of the software and its history, with no 'reception' section or anything like it. It should be merged into Nagoya Institute of Technology under a "notable projects" section as this article is essentially a WP:PERMASTUB. In solidarity, PokemonPerson (talk) 01:59, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Merge per nominator's rationale. FaviFake (talk) 07:32, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:09, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:28, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep These two sources barely establish notability of the subject. Adding every notable project done by the faculty to the university page would be undue and, in general, unusual, so I am against a merge, stubs are not bad. Kelob2678 (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:45, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Huang's law

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Huang's law
• Articles for deletion/Huang's law (2nd nomination)

Huang's law (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SUSTAINED. Also fails WP:PROMO in its current state. The article reads as one long puff piece extolling the virtues of Huang and Nvidia’s products. This fact aside, the topic itself has no sustained coverage or notability. The article cites only a single WP:RS, the Wall Street Journal (the other references are blogs or news aggregators), which has used the phrase “Huang’s Law” just one time in a single article (the very article which coined the phrase!). I cannot find any evidence of the use of the term or reference to the “law” in any third-party reliable source in the 6 years since 2020, when it was “coined”, let alone the “significant and lasting” coverage required to warrant an article. Even Nvidia seems to have given up on it, the last occurrence on their website being a 2023 blog post. This is in contrast to Moore’s Law which is widely discussed and has an extensive Wikipedia article dedicated to it, featuring the section Moore’s Law#Other formulations and similar observations in which dozens of equivalent or related statements (such as this one) are listed. Laurdecl ^talk 09:33, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related AfD discussions. Laurdecl ^talk 09:33, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

• Keep Meets WP:GNG. For PROMO I don't see it and anyway that is an editorial issue not AfD. Notability does not expire, if something was notable at one time it still is. It does not need to be true or accurate, only notable. For sustained coverage, here are a few recent, there are more:

• WIRED Magazine May/June 2024 – "Huang’s Law" cover article
• "Nvidia: AI Computing Beyond Huang's Law" (Ivey Publishing, April 2025; Harvard Business Review)
• "Moore’s Law Built Your Stadium. Huang’s Law Is About to Disrupt It." (Stadium Tech Report, April 2026)
• Intro to Parallel Computing (2025), Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center, Slide 24 - nb. it does not need to be true or accurate to be notable.
• 100% Utilization: Computation and Labor After Moore's Law, Andrew Lison, MIT Press, 2026.
• Naval AI Summit 2024, US Navy, slide 5
• "The Cost of Justice at the Dawn of AI", George Washington University Law School, 2024
• Computer Concepts, Open Educational Resource (OER) textbook, 2024
• "A Present Where AI is Enhancing Laboratory Medicine", peer reviewed journal article, 2025

-- GreenC 19:35, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

The Wired article is not about the subject of this article. It defines “Huang’s Law” as being “As AI grows, so does Nvidia.” So this a completely different “law” than the one this article is about. The phrase “Huang’s Law” doesn’t even appear in the body of the magazine, only on the title page. There is however plently of discussion of Moore’s Law, quote:

You mentioned Moore’s law. Is it irrelevant now? Moore’s law is now much more of a systems problem than a chip problem. It’s much more about the interconnectivity of multiple chips. About 10, 15 years ago, we started down the journey of disaggregating the computer so that you could take multiple chips and connect them together. Which is where your acquisition of the Israeli company Mellanox comes in, in 2019. Nvidia said at the time that modern computing has put enormous demands on data centers and that Mellanox’s networking technology would make accelerated computing more efficient. Right, exactly. We bought Mellanox so that we could take an extension of our chip and make an entire data center into a super chip, which enabled the modern AI supercomputer. That was really about recognizing that Moore’s law has come to an end and that if we want to continue to scale computing we have to doit at data center scale. We looked at the way Moore’s law was formulated, and we said, “Don’t be limited by that. Moore’s law is not a limiter to computing.” We have to leave Moore’s law behind so we can think about new ways of scaling.

Zero mention of “Huang’s Law” in the interview or the discussion of it. Laurdecl ^talk 06:06, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

“Stadium Tech Report” appears to be a pay-to-publish PR/marketing outlet. It may also be WP:CIRCULAR as I have found a similar article which cites this Wikipedia page as its first and only source. Laurdecl ^talk 06:26, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: the first nomination from 2020, much closer to when this first came up, ended in "no consensus". (No opinion.). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:21, 3 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:55, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:45, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep per GreenC. The phenomenon, regardless of whether it's accurate or not, has been widely discussed and covered by reliable media outlets, which demonstrates notability. I also fail to see how the article in its current state constitutes a form of promotion. Yes, the article contains Huang's name and an image of him; If you want to interpret that as promo, then you are free to do so, but by that metric, virtually every article about a company or person is a form of promo. Maxeto0910 (talk) 12:02, 24 September 2026 (UTC)