Talk:Service-level objective

From VfD
from VfD:

Valid topic, invalid article (and almost certainly copyvio, as well). SLO's vary widely from company to company. This article does not discuss the topic, but lists the SLO's for a single company (Rabobank). 'Looks like it came straight from company literature. SWAdair | Talk 10:09, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Not encyclopedian. Needs a complete rewrite. Unless someone is willing to do that, delete. jni 11:59, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Objective one:Delete --Improv 18:43, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Remove copyvios and inaccuracies and keep as a substub.--Tomheaton 19:14, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep in principle, although if it has copyvios it has to be deleted and rewritten independantly of copyrighted material. &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  22:56, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * List on the Copyvio page, where it will be deleted if it doesn't get cleared. No "oh, but the topic is wonderful" stuff.  We're not judging topics, just articles.  If Tomheaton thinks the topic is great but the copyvio bad, then he can repair it himself, and then we'll all vote keep. Geogre 18:09, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I've done just that.--Tomheaton 19:44, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 18:11, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Regardless of copyvio, delete. Nothing to say that isn't already better said in other articles about business contracts.  Rossami 02:30, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Rewritten. Copyvios and inaccuracies removed.  Perfectly valid topic.  Now a perfectly valid stub.  If someone that happens knows more about the subject happens upon the entry then they can expand it.--Tomheaton 19:44, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * As rewritten, it seems to be a valid topic. Needs a lot of work, but borderline Keep. --Improv 20:14, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion


 * Proposing to rename page to Service Level Objective (and then link to from Service Level Agreement) Duncanrshannon 21:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)