Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timing delay in vlsi circuit Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Timing_delay_in_vlsi_circuit

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. Michig (talk) 10:35, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Timing delay in vlsi circuit

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

What can I say? The article has no sources, and it is not clear what it is even about. It is not clear to the casual observer that it is even about a real subject. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 08:38, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:20, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just one specific type of delay in Very-large-scale integration systems, for which is very improbable to warrant a WP:SPINOUT of any form. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The understanding and approximate calculation of timings and delays is an important topic in circuit design, enough so that we already have several articles on it: Delay calculation, Static timing analysis, Statistical static timing analysis, Elmore delay, etc. It is conceivable that one could write an article on timing issues in VLSI design using books like Static Timing Analysis for Nanometer Designs: A Practical Approach and class lectures like [1]. But this article has only a barest, confusing, unannotated list of delay types. I don't think there is compelling reason to keep this less than a stub of an article just for its suggestive title. There is no prejudice to someone creating a proper article on this notable topic. --Mark viking (talk) 09:46, 30 March 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.