Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waka (protocol)

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 merge and redirect, which has already been peformed Shii (tock) 04:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Waka (protocol)[edit]

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

Vaporware cited only to blogs. Shii (tock) 02:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am required by an unwritten Wikipedia Law to also note that this Internet idea does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (software). Failure to abide by this Wikipedia Law will result in an admin closure against consensus. Shii (tock) 07:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcasm is also against the Wiki Law, mortal. Prepare to be assimilated. Diego (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found some slides from IEEE proceedings[1] but nothing on Google Scholar. Possibly not notable yet. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't quite seem to be there yet; WP:CRYSTAL seems to apply. 86.** IP (talk) 07:20, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if Im doing this wrong, I found the same primer on the IETF's website that Colapenisula found, the protocol is EXACTLY what the web needs, let the guy finish developing it, it will likely supplant HTTP in a decade if not contribute to another replacement, HTTP *IS* incredibly wasteful, it can be shrunk 90% or more and every dev knows it, it's also plagued with requiring responses from the server to render things that nowdays causes blank pages of death that confuses people among other annoying things. HTTP is not perfect, let WAKA live.
- That has nothing to do with the Wikipedia article Shii (tock) 12:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why nominate for deletion when you can fix it? I've merged this article into the obviously appropriate Roy Fielding. This AfD in need of attention can be now closed as Merge and redirect. Diego (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2012 (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.