Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analytic Hierarchy Process/More Hierarchies


 * 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   Closed as moot. While Analytic Hierarchy Process itself seems to be an elaborate way to prevent any decisions from ever being made, this page was apparently made to draft proposed additions to this page. As such, it ought to have been created as a subpage to the talk page. I moved this to Talk:Analytic Hierarchy Process/More Hierarchies. As such, Miscellany for Deletion rather than Articles for Deletion now has jurisdiction, and this proposal is closed as moot. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Analytic Hierarchy Process/More Hierarchies

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete this is covered in the main article: if something is too detailed to be covered it is probably inappropriate for a tertiary project like an encyclopedia. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep. The material on this page probably belongs in the main article, but it needs first to be seen and discussed by those who are working on the article. The main article is already very long, so we are reluctant to put additional material into it without prior comment. If this is not the way to do what we are trying, please let us know how we should do it. Whatever you do, PLEASE don't just delete the page without giving us a chance to capture what is on it. Lou Sander (talk) 02:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Move. Since subpages are disabled in articlespace this article is mistitled (because of the slash); it should be moved to talk if people at the article want to discuss it's inclusion. (To nom: spinning out subsections in order to keep the main article relatively short is recommended practice per Summary style. Since we don't have paper restrictions we can be as detailed as we want as long as it is verifiable (and as long as the basics are covered first) - Mgm|(talk) 09:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * MGML: I don't understand what you are saying. If subpages are disabled, how do we "spin out subsections"??? Lou Sander (talk) 23:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * MGML: Never mind. I followed your link and read it. Lou Sander (talk) 23:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   kur  ykh   00:17, 26 January 2009 (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.