Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Difference between IMAP and SMTP


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 13:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Difference between IMAP and SMTP

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Procedural nom; second PROD. 2nd prod rationale was "Nothing in this article is relevant to the name of the article". Original prod rationale was "Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought (WP:NOT) or a guidebook (WP:NOTGUIDE)" (This was me, apparently.) Marasmusine (talk) 17:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Prodded before as apparent copy/paste; author removed prod without rationale. -- JN 466  17:58, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Completely unencyclopedically written original research. And a strange pair of protocols to compare since they are for quite different problems: one is for receiving mail, the other for sending mail. It would make far more sense to compare POP and IMAP, and one could probably even find reliable sources for such a comparison. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:33, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - There're differences, but none of them are encyclopedic. Shadowjams (talk) 07:41, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - There might even be encyclopedic differences if they are compared at the correct level, but this article revealed nothing of it. I removed all of the personal essay and how-to from the article, and nothing is left, so I copy-pasted the first sentences of the respective articles. This should have been speedied. It's just some kid's essay. Marasmusine, thanks for applying the correct prods even if they didn't work. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 22:39, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is already covered in Internet mail standard, although there are few incoming links for that page. Sussexonian (talk) 21:29, 27 December 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.