Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Introduction to cloud computing Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Introduction_to_cloud_computing

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. Consensus is that we don't need this separate article. Whether a redirect is useful is not clear from this discussion and can be decided separately.  Sandstein  07:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to cloud computing (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)

A fork of cloud computing intended for providing more "user-friendly" explanation of the concept. The merge of topics was discussed in March 2012, and the consensus was reached on merging the article, though the author of forked article disagrees both with merge and deletion. As the name of the fork is unlikely search term and Cloud computing article is readily accessible by non-technical users, the fork is not needed and should be deleted per WP:DEL#REASON #5. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• While I'm generally a supporter of "Introduction to ..."-style articles on technical subjects (e.g. mathematics or physics), I find it difficult to imagine that the main "cloud computing" article would ever become so technical as to require an introductory counterpart. Comparing the two articles I see few differences between the two: at best the introductory article is more difficult to follow and looks more like a writer's notebook than a fleshed out article. This smells of a plain content fork. Unless the author of the introduction can clearly explain how the introductory article would eventually differ from the main article and why such an introductory article is necessary in the first place, I'm inclined towards deleting it. —Ruud 18:00, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as an unnecessary content fork. Shadowjams (talk) 19:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Cloud computing. Unnecessary fork as discussed here. I have already attempted to merge any useful material into Cloud computing. --Kvng (talk) 13:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record: what is the rationale behind the proposed redirect? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:05, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Introduction to cloud computing gets about 12,000 visits per month. I doubt all of these visitors would find Cloud computing without a redirect. --Kvng (talk) 00:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge without redirect. Dmitrij makes a very sensible argument here. There should be an introduction to cloud computing in the main article, and a fork should be unnecessary. Steven Walling • talk 04:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free rake a cut at improving Cloud computing using information from Introduction to cloud computing at any time. I gave it a shot but didn't find anything in Introduction to cloud computing that I could use. --Kvng (talk) 13:48, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - an an introduction, it is still complicated. Bearian (talk) 21:55, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the introduction article is not written in the style of a nontechnical introduction to the subject. A typical internet user needs to see a few everyday examples of cloud computing (e.g. webmail, Google Docs), without all the abstract generalisation. This can easily be included at the top of the main article. Also I think it's important for readers to understand that cloud computing is not a new idea - it is a fashionable new term for something which has existed since the earliest days of computer networking. Before the advent of desktop PCs, academics used simple terminals connected via a network (e.g. the Internet) to a large server; email was stored on the server, and computations were performed on the server. When computers became accessible to the public, however, people started downloading their email using POP3 clients, and running MS Office on their own PC. Now users and businesses seem to have suddenly rediscovered the advantages of 1960s computing - sharing powerful resources on remote servers, and storing documents and emails in a networked location accessible from more than one device. As far as I can tell, "cloud computing" is mostly marketing hype for the reinvention of a very old idea. The "History" section in the main article does explain this background to some extent, but this is not explained anywhere in the introduction article. Mtford (talk) 11:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, burn it with fire and redirect. Both Cloud computing and Introduction to cloud computing are a load of buzzword-riddled, badly-written bollocks designed to gratify the precious egos of clueless management types. May as well have only one of these clunking great monstrosities cluttering up the wiki rather than two. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, do not merge, per Tom Morris. Substandard. Ceoil (talk) 14:04, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Please, delete, per Ceoil and Tom Moriss. Frood! ^Ohai _{What did I break now?} 15:00, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect mostly useless. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 19:01, 28 July 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.