Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transitioning from a Waterfall to a Scrum Environment: Project Teams


 * 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. I'd be happy to provide the text of the deleted article if anyone wants to move it to Wikibooks or elsewhere. Olaf Davis (talk) 23:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Transitioning from a Waterfall to a Scrum Environment: Project Teams

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Page is not encyclopedic. It is a how-to guide. LionMans Account (talk) 02:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

This page is interesting and adds to the mention of project teams switching to agile from a waterfall methodology, wiki has no information about transitioning roles to agile frameworks and or enviroments. It just needs to be revised and edited and not deleted in its entirety. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.27.199.88 (talk) 07:08, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Might fit in on Wikibooks though. Although that's a lower-trafficked site, it is a place for how-to guides and the like. LionMans Account (talk) 15:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Agree that Wikibooks could be a better place for this and related content from this group. I'll suggest it on their talk page.Dialectric (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per policy Like all the other articles created in good faith by this now-blocked group account, this is original research and synthesis, which has no place in Wikipedia: sorry, gang. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  12:24, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Unencyclopedic article with multiple issues including original research, WP:SYNTH, and how-to content.Dialectric (talk) 14:54, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Respectfully suggest keeping the article:
 * 1) Our group (now blocked) is NOT a corporation; this was simply a school assignment for Agile Project management. We were asked to create agile articles using a Scrum framework and upload into Wikipedia.
 * 2) As mentioned, edits are being made to provide considerations and not be perscriptive, making it less of a 'how to.' It also does not endorse a particular methodology (Scrum or Waterfall). It simply articulates considerations for a transition (which happens in the business world). It is my understanding that authors are given an opportunity to continue editing and make the article acceptable. Consequently, I request I be given such time.
 * 3) Could one not assert that all encyclopedic entries are a synthesis of other research?
 * 4) I respectfully request the page be saved and debated in more depth (and similar tranisitioning articles), given the complete lack of transitioning material currently listed in Wikipedia. If you'd still like article(s) deleted, I won't object, but I would at least like at least a month for others to opine so that the issue is more thoroughly and formally vetted. Respectfully, author -- Tom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.98.229.10 (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Tom Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately you didn't address the comments of other people above. If you want this article to stay then go back over each of the comments above, follow the links to WP policy pages and if you believe the comments are incorrect then explain how that is so. For instance you say there is a "complete lack of transitioning material currently listed on Wikipedia" which suggests you didn't understand the comment above explaining why this is so. Arguing that all encyclopedic articles are a synthesis suggests you have not read WP:SYNTH. Many thousands of articles have been considered for deletion and a procedure for this has been developed over the years. We will not be changing the WP:AFD procedure no matter how politely you request it. The comments above are suggesting ways that this article can be incorporated in the Wikimedia sites and exactly where it has problems that need to be fixed. I politely suggest you take their advice and address the issues raised. Waiting "for others to opine' won't make these issues go away. filceolaire (talk) 08:08, 29 May 2014 (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.