Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dynamic XML Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dynamic_XML

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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 10:48, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic XML (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Dicdef, sources do not appear to be reliable. Article managed to go nearly 8 years without a single edit, suggesting that this is not a notable topic. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 21:25, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 21:25, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete just a dictionary definition, lacks encyclopedic content. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 19:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There are scattered uses of the term in the literature, e.g., [1], but I cannot find good secondary RS talking about this class of documents. I don't see a good redirect target either. Hence delete. --Mark viking (talk) 03:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. non-notable. DaveApter (talk) 16:38, 14 September 2017 (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.