Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of OpenDocument and Office Open XML formats


 * 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. Sr13 17:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Comparison of OpenDocument and Office Open XML formats

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

too much of a POV screed - even reverting most of the POV/OR, there's still a POV Will (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC) But here, it should be deleted. --SunStar Net talk 21:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree. I also see a possible violation of No original research, perhaps in WP:SYN. Shalom Hello 16:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't know how possible for these kind of articles that start w/ Comparison to be NPOV. I am talking about Comparison of the Java and .NET platforms and Comparison of C Sharp and Java as well. -- FayssalF  - Wiki me up®  16:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - POV, OR, and even advertising, to a point. This is highly subjective, and if isn't POV after editing, it soon would be. MSJapan 16:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh? It seems to be reasonably NPOV to me, presenting well cited claims by both sides, although it's a topic I don't know much about. the wub "?!"  17:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see it transwiki'd to somewhere, since a lot of work has obviously gone into it. I just don't know where. the wub "?!"  23:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete POV, OR also advertising. Oysterguitarist 17:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Although it does seem fairly NPOV, the entire "comparison" business is original research. EyeSereneTALK 18:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This should be a section in an article dealing w/topic, not it's own article --UntilMoraleImproves 18:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, or if it must be kept - Transwiki to Wikibooks - and yes the article does contain original research, which is not permitted here. This should really be on a Microsoft-related Wiki: I'm sure it could go to a Wikia wiki, if someone wants this.


 * 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.