Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anamorphic Development


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Anamorphic Development

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Methodology which has no references in reliable, secondary sources and does not appear to meet notability guidelines. Contested PROD. Pnm (talk) 03:16, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems promotional and related to the marketing strategy of a single company which is also the sole source. Clovis Sangrail (talk) 03:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 12:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Also unreadable original research related to someone's vague "philosophy" of computer programming: This methodology is not widely used or approved of, as it allows for many modifications; but since there is no hard plan, this is not thought of as modifications, but more as morphing to more closely suit the needs of the end users, to more completely satisfy the concept as a whole, and to provide a better product with higher end user satisfaction and usability. By this methodology, it is better to have a more generalized and dynamic concept which you can adapt to as you go, as opposed to starting out with a static idea and a rigid and thorough plan, as problems arise each time a need changes or is realized. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Only one reference and it doesn't work. Have read article twice and am none the wiser as to what it's subject actually is. Hoax? Tigerboy1966 (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - This sounds like a methodology for disaster. From what I can tell, it essentially does nothing up front, and kind of just wings it based on user feedback.  I can find no coverage in reliable sources about this "methodology". All references to the term relate to biology/zoology -- Whpq (talk) 16:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete just an ad for the company. The world is full of these "methodologies" that are just excuses for managers to be disorganized but sound like they are following something trendy or disciplined. Amusing that one of the few links is to anamorphism, a very particular mathematical concept that seems like it has little to do with the idea of disorganized management proposed. W Nowicki (talk) 18:58, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Single-sourced promotion. --Kvng (talk) 18:05, 27 November 2011 (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.