Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of file systems

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 of the debate was Speedy Keep, WP:SNOW — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of file systems

Keep. I don't really care if the other comparisons get deleted, but I would about this one. I consider myself a quite knowledgable in the area of file systems and am certain this comparison can meet WP:V. About the duplication with the articles on individual articles... I think it would be preferable if this comparision could be generated automatically from the articles, but until we have the technology available to do just that I think this article would best be kept. —Ruud 17:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per nom. Every one of these articles has been prod tagged without any reason given. That is just plain vandalism. Given that lots of editors have worked on these and there are often on going discussions concerning content and merges, they all, at the very least, merit individual examination. -- JJay 17:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep no brainer, let's not waste too much time deliberating/discussing this. What crazy fool nominated this? --OscarTheCat ^talk 17:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with the proviso that someone with expertise really needs to add some encyclopedic text which explains the significance of each of the tables. --Allan McInnes (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oscarthecat, please review WP:CIVIL. That being said, keep, obviously, and cleanup per Allan McInnes. Why is this even here? The pointless PRODs were immediately gone, after all. Sandstein 18:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, without the need to call anyone a fool. PJM 18:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep, as the nom is making a WP:POINT (see his edit history). Also, per WP:NOT, structured lists are fine. This is not a "mere list." See also WP:LIST. I'm a huge fan of removing a bunch of software lists, but the comparsison articles are generally good (and, this one in particular, is fine). Also: nom didn't even suggest a reason for deletion in this nomination. --Karnesky
Keep. And please remove moderator privileges from the moron who listed it. Is there any process to vote for that? --Alkrow 20:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you talking to me? —Ruud 20:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh wait... You first nominate it for deletion and then vote Keep. I am confused now. You signed with a different username. --Alkrow 20:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, from the looks of the edit history, he saw the prod tag on this page, and went "Hell No, this shouldn't be prodded.", prompting him to create an AfD and come straight here with a keep vote. It says that contested deletions should be brought to AfD, there's nothing said that the person that brings the article here should want it deleted. The original prodder does not appear to want to comment on his/her reasons for deletion.-- Saberwyn 21:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Powers that Be, can we get a speedy keep and early close, please? -- Saberwyn 21:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.