Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asset Description Metadata Schema (ADMS)


 * 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   no consensus. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Asset Description Metadata Schema (ADMS)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Seems a little promotional, but not quite bad enough for a CSD. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:04, 1 May 2012 (UTC)



I have updated the page including some related work and external references. This is work in which several standardisation organisations were involved including W3C: http://www.w3.org/ns/adms. Stijngoedertier 11:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:45, 8 May 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep — Seems notable, just needs to be renamed to take out the (ADMS) out of the title, and rewriting to remove the advertisement tone. Ugncreative Usergname (talk) 18:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete can't find any independent sources which establish notability. --Kvng (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep - people may find Ontologies boring but they are important, enabling complicated businesses to describe exactly what software, data and other machines are made of. The ADMS is a notable way of doing this. The article is properly cited, and its clear recognition as one of the main choices open to software people at the world wide web consortium (w3.org) should make it clear this is not an article to delete. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:33, 17 May 2012 (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.