Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prepare (SQL) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Prepare_(SQL)

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 redirect to Prepared statement. JohnCD (talk) 11:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prepare (SQL)

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

Fails WP:GNG. I'm probably going to be criticized for taking this to AfD, but why would we want separate articles on computer instructions? Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. Bbb23 (talk) 00:35, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No criticism from me - this is an unnotable software command. If there's a list of SQL commands it could redirect there, but otherwise delete for failing the general notability guideline. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 10:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cursor (databases) or Query optimization depending on WP:EXPERT. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It could probably become a small section within query optimisation, but it has little to do with cursors. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The current one sentence article is pretty useless, but I have little doubt one could write an encyclopedic article on prepared SQL queries. I don't think the suggested redirect targets above are very sensical. Merging this into as a new section of the SQL article would be a better option. —Ruud 14:49, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy redirect to Prepared statement. Obviously... —Ruud 17:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's potential scope here for something, but this isn't even a stub. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Ruud --Northernhenge (talk) 21:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I support Ruud's redirect.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:49, 20 March 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.