User talk:Drmajidn

Nomination of Digital-Logic-Design for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Digital-Logic-Design is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Digital-Logic-Design until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SpinningSpark 11:01, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Digital Logic Design
Hello Drmajidn,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Digital Logic Design for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. William2001 (talk) 18:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014
Hello, I'm MrOllie. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links.  MrOllie (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of DLD - Digital Logic Design
Hello, Drmajidn. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, DLD - Digital Logic Design, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. —Swpbtalk 01:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I see that you have created this article yet again, but this time with some sources. Would you please provide some quotations from the off-line sources that verify that this product is notable. You really need to start communicating with us, the article is currently heading for another deletion and we may start treating you as a disruptive editor. SpinningSpark 01:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Having looked at this in a bit more depth, I am fairly convinced that the referencing is faked in that none of the refs (except ref#5 and #6, the product's website and Sourceforge, not independent sources) actually refer to this product at all. The earliest archive in the Wayback Machine for both the official website and the Sourceforge page is 8th November 2014.  This happens to be the same date as the creation of the Wikipedia page and I surmise that this is the product launch date.  The Sourceforge page confirms this, showing a registration date of 7th November 2014.  All the other references are dated many years before this so are unlikely to contain any mention of this product.  Further, I believe ref#1 verifies only that computer science courses exist, ref#2 verifies only that computer architecture exists, and ref#3 verifies only that embedded systems exist.  I have no access to ref#4 but if it is following the pattern of the rest then it is confirming only that digital design exists.
 * If I am wrong in this assessment please explain and I will happily restore the article. You need to provide page numbers for the sources so that they can be checked by other editors.  Direct quotations would also be helpful in convincing us.  But please stop recreating the article under different titles.  That is very disruptive, either the subject can be shown to be notable and it can stay under its original title, or it can't, in which case we can't have it under any title. SpinningSpark 10:47, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

DLD - Digital Logic Design is a new educational tool to provide assistance in teaching those subject areas mentioned in the article. The references given in the article is related to those subjects which are using some old tools to teach these subjects. Those tools are either outdated or no longer supported on new platforms. The research paper related to this new tool is under review process in some research journal and, as in most cases, will take around 1-2 year to come in print. I included this article to provide a resource for the students and teaching community who come to wiki for this purpose and found outdated software links on this prestigious site page. Regards majid


 * Hi Dr. Majid, thanks for responding. The problem here is that Wikipedia requires a topic to meet our notability guidelines before it can have a page.  As a new tool, this is not going to do that.  Even when your paper is published, that will not be enough because it is not independent.  When others have discussed the tool in reliable sources, then will be the time to start an article.  There is a very short, helpful summary of our requirements at WP:42. SpinningSpark 08:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)