Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Placement syntax

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 keep. John254 01:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Placement syntax

Placement syntax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Declined prod. Manual/how-to like tone, but Wikipedia is not a how-to site. KurtRaschke (talk) 23:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy keep. How about re-reading an article before going for AfD? [1] The tone is encyclopedic, the article is probably more informative than any of the 12 inline sources and 5 "Further reading" sources alone. --Hans Adler (talk) 00:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Encyclopedic description of a programming language construct. --Itub (talk) 08:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep It's not a "how-to" and in fact is better-written than any of my C++ textbooks. --Rodhullandemu 12:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
• Comment The article still doesn't put the idea of "placement syntax" into context of how it would be used in the real world. It reads like the grammatical description of a programming language. Squidfryerchef (talk) 16:49, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but I don't see how this comment makes any sense, even taking into account its ambiguity. The article says very clearly that its context is the C++ programming language. Therefore by "in the real world" you must mean C++ programming. (Unless you are one of those people who still haven't understood that Wikipedia is hundreds of subject specific highly specialised encyclopedias as well as a big general one, and who think that any article on details of brain surgery which they don't understand completely should be deleted.) The article explains the details of syntax, as you would expect from any reference work covering the topic. The article has a section placement syntax#Use with no less than 4 subsections, each of which explains one way in which placement new can be used to solve a type of problem. There is even example code there. It explains this to readers who can write C++, because these are the only readers who are ever likely to read this article in the first place. (Outside the context of an AfD travesty, of course.) --Hans Adler (talk) 20:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
• Note to closing admin If this AFD is closed delete then Placement new which is a redirect to this article should be deleted under CSD R1. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 30 November 2008 (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.