Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Agile work

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 of the debate was Delete. Deathphoenix ʕ 00:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Agile work

this doesnt look like itll ever be encyclopedic even with a lot of work. just a list of instructions at the moment. BL Lacertae - kiss the lizard 00:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete So far, the only real references are to Agile software development. Trying to expand it otherwise is probably Original Research. Ted
• Delete, corporate gibberish I say, with little room for expansion per Ted. Jammo (SM247) 01:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. —Khoikhoi 02:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable, no context, unverified and no sources given. External link goes to a consultancy, which therefore looks to be an ad. Tychocat 03:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Appears to be somewhere between original research and an advert. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 04:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep There is potiential for this article to be expanded. Moreover, Mberteig, the creator of this article states that he is looking for feedback for this article and eventually expand it. This article is also verified. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 05:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Verified? The source in the article is the primary contributor's website...--Isotope23 13:44, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This is one step above patent nonsense, maybe not even that. jgp 07:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as I understand it this is an attempt to document the application of Agile to non-software projects? Appears to be Original Research. The only external references I can find to this were all written by Mishkin Berteig, who based on the username is presumably the article's creator. No predjudice against recreation if Agile methodology is ever widely adopted oustide the realm of software, and this can be verifiably sourced.--Isotope23 13:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Specialized, nn usage. Adambiswanger1 19:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

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.