Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/No User Interface


 * 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. BJ Talk 20:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

No User Interface

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

Contested prod. Unsourced neologism and dictionary definition. Please see edit summary when article was created.  TN ‑ X - Man  21:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Well it's niether a Dicdef or a neologism, but a statement which is completely unencyclopedic. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 22:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. While the concept is meritorious, it does not look WP:notable. There are many Google hits for NUI as an acronym for "Natural User Interface" and a few for "Network User Interface." Googling the acronym and phrase together shows some uses of "nui" as a switch for disabling user interaction. (The IEEE and VTT papers are false positives. The latter is a good read on ubiquitous computing.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looking at the page history and discussion page, as well as the article itself, it appears to have been created for marketing purposes, raising conflict of interest and neutrality issues. It may belong in a pamphlet for businesses about product design, but not Wikipedia. Beyond that, a Google define: search returns no relevant results for both "No User Interface" and "NUI". It is not notable and the article offers no citations indicating the widespread use of the acronym: indeed, the edit summary from the creation of the article suggests the editor made it up themselves. Phlyght (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Jimmi Hugh. For those wandering what unencyclopedic means here: this article is an essay that tries to justify a (new?) acronym, so it violates WP:NOT and WP:OR. Based on this, I have strong doubts that it's worthy of Wiktionary, so I'm removing that tag. VasileGaburici (talk) 04:19, 18 September 2008 (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.