Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extensibility pattern Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Extensibility_pattern

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 and redirect to Extensibility.  Sandstein  09:16, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Extensibility pattern (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)

This page is almost word for word the same as this page from the Perl Design Patterns Book. It has been flagged as a how-to article and for not meeting Wikipedia's standards since 2009. --Pleasantville (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to extensibility. A quick search does not turn up any sources that corroborate this article's treatment of several well-known software extensibility technologies (covered in other articles) as a single software design pattern, so the article is a how-to guide masquerading as an encyclopedic article by the addition of a novel lede. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 10:55, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - This discussion was created without the afd2 template and never transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I offer no opinion on the nomination itself. --Finngall ^talk 17:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect. Even on the Perl Design Patterns site it is listed under Application Features, not under any of the pattern types. In a search on Google and Google books, design patterns are described as having extensibility rather than there being an extensibility pattern. However the extensibility article doesn't mention design patterns, so a redirect might not be appropriate. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:22, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:25, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This reads like an essay and seems to contain WP:OR; the rest does seem somewhat like a how-to manual. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not this. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Extensibility is a concern in program design, but "design pattern" and "extensibility pattern" do not appear to be terms of art in the field. Not withstanding the article Hummes, Jakob, and Bernard Merialdo. 2000 "Design of extensible component-based groupware." Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 9.1: 53-74. The term appears with more regularity in biology and medicine, usually with respect to muscles and other flexible articulata.  --Bejnar (talk) 20:07, 18 December 2015 (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.