Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OpenGL

I'll ask again. Do we really want articles on subroutines? RickK 20:44, 16 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not (should not be) an API reference. Delete -- Cyrius|&#9998 21:27, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * We don't want you vandalizing Wikipedia. Btw, GL_QUADS is a data type and fbdevhw is a module. It's ok that you don't know that but don't take out your anger on us. Eric B. and Rakim 21:56, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Have you considered starting a book about OpenGL programming at Wikibooks? That would be a completely appropriate place for this kind of data. Fredrik 00:00, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I find it very patronizing of you to tell us what to do. Why don't you go to Wikibooks delete page (if there is one) and waste your breath there? Eric B. and Rakim 17:39, 17 May 2004 (UTC)~
 * I find it very patronizing of you to tell us how to create an encyclopedia. RickK 22:52, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * When Eric B. and Rakim speak in the plural possessive, they are apparently speaking about the two authors responding together to Wikipedia's solicitation for literary donations. When you speak in the plural possessive, RickK, who are you speaking for? Who elected you? You are about the top Wikipunk of the year so far, RickK, and that is all you are. Bele 04:03, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * He's at the very least speaking for me. Now, whose sockpuppet are you? Fredrik 22:26, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
 * We're not telling you how to create an encyclopedia. We're creating the articles by ourself. We just wish that people like you would stop interfering. Eric B. and Rakim 00:31, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: You might also want to review the policy on personal attacks, as might several other VfD contributors. Vandalizing? But you're not the only one to argue this way recently by any means. Andrewa 04:17, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, all of them. The chances that someone would want to look these particular items up in Wikipedia are slim. The articles themselves are stubby and shallow and provide no insight that could not be better obtained through a standard OpenGL reference. Dpbsmith 22:07, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree with Fredrik, wikibooks would be appropriate. --Starx 01:35, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I know little about Wikibooks, but that would seem a more appropriate location. Isomorphic 02:00, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikibooks and delete. This is not encyclopedia material. Eric B. and Rakim - grow up. Screaming "vandal!" at people who are just trying to help get your material moved to the best place for it isn't endearing you to anyone. --Stormie 06:33, May 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * We're grown up enough thankyouverymuch. And maybe you can enlighten us if there really is another word to describe those who tries to destroy your work because they are ignorant than "vandals"? Eric B. and Rakim 17:39, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: not suitable for Wikipedia. Why not try something like this at, say, opengl.org? Since there already exists a lot of documentation on OpenGL, it doesn't seem very useful to start a new documentation project at Wikibooks. Wile E. Heresiarch 18:18, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete all. We tried. Until they read the doco, they're unlikely to contribute anything worthwhile. This applies both to Wikipedia policies on what is wanted both in the article namespace and here on VfD, and to the existing user guides for the subjects on which they wish to contribute. I also note that these seem to be the same guys who contributed and then rudely defended the Ballerium Wikispam. Food for thought? Andrewa 19:21, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge with OpenGL and delete. Keeping these itty-bitty highly-specialized niblets as standalone articles is not fundamentally different from keeping all those silly StarCraft game units lying around. Denni 21:38, 2004 May 18 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not Eric/Rakim's programming reference. JFW | T@lk  23:42, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I think they're not suitable for Wikipedia but for Wikibooks, too. Copy to Wikibooks and delete from Wikipedia is best solution. ja.PiaCarrot 13:15, 2004 May 21 (UTC)