Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instruction set matrix Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Instruction_set_matrix

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. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Instruction set matrix (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

The article's topic is of questionable notability. Using "instruction set matrix" -Wikipedia as the query, Google Web returns 48 results; Books, 5 results; and Scholar, 1 result. All are irrelevant, being a coincidental matches of words across sentences, etc.; referring to instruction listings in table form; or are mirrors of the Wikipedia article. The article cites one reference, but it unavailable for preview on Google Books. However, given that the article claims that the topic is used in compilers to support architectures with variable-length instructions, one expects there to be more results from Google, since such architectures are not uncommon. The lack of coverage of a topic that claims to be widely relevant strongly suggests that the topic is not notable. Finally, searching for instruction set matrix (without enclosing the term in quotes) returns many more results. These results are irrelevant because they refer to lists of instructions presented in a table (matrix) format for easy reference. Rilak (talk) 22:42, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The only given source is to cite the information on different microprocessors' supporting different instruction sets. The given source is in fact a collection of 36 different articles (see Application Specific Array Processors, 1991. Proceedings of the International Conference). While this information is added to the article page in 2006, it was already available on [1] in 2001 with the same sentences, suggesting that the information is directly copied and pasted from the site [2] (or from a common source). Other informations on the page lack the proper references and citations. While I could find a few sources for the Matrix instruction set on Instruction set architecture articles on the web, I'm unable to find any sources for the Instruction set matrix. This might explain the lack of new references and/or information on this article since 2006. Nimuaq (talk) 12:55, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP:N, WP:V, WP:OR. Pburka (talk) 03:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Nimuaq's look into the reference made me notice an irregularity: The reference is supporting the statement about the ARM and MIPS architectures having variable-length instructions; and the reference is the proceedings of a conference held in 1991. However, ARM and MIPS did not have variable-length instructions until the Thumb and MIPS16 extensions, respectively, were added in the mid-1990s, and well beyond 1991 when the conference was held. So what is the reference meant to be verifying? I have no idea. Could it have been vandalism or a mistake? Looking at the first revision of the article, the reference has not moved from its present location. Additionally, looking at the abstracts of the conference papers at IEEE Xplore, I see nothing that indicated that the topic has any coverage in the proceedings in an obvious manner. As a result, the reference appears to be erroneous; and while it may have been an honest mistake, it does give additional weight to deletion by adding verification concerns to notability. Rilak (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:43, 27 April 2011 (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.