Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Softcoding Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Softcoding

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 merge‎ to Hard coding. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Softcoding (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Tagged for notability since 2010. Nearly unsourced neologism. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 18:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or merge to hard coding. This is a real topic likely notable, as evidenced by RS articles [1] and [2] and a chapter in an O'Reilly book [3]. hard coding is an obvious merge/redirect target. I don't see why this was posted to AfD; there is no solid rationale for deletion. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 17:36, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Hard coding. That is the actual notable concept, softcoding is a little-known neologism always defined in opposition to hardcoding. Tercer (talk) 12:43, 24 August 2023 (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.