Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacix

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Sacix.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to keep the article.

---

~Delete. Garbage - Pedro 01:35, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

• Keep. Over-condensed article, but not garbage. Or do you mean the software itself is garbage? Mikkalai 20:29, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
• It seems Pedro loves to delete... but why Sacix would be garbage? (unsigned comment at 22:26, May 19, 2004 by User:Leandrod)
  • Really... you dont like people to touch your POV. Sacix is just an add. I'm amazed and not understanding why you didnt created an article about yourself. Or there is one? As we say, and ask, in Portugal "when an article about 'santa cona dos assobios' will be written?" --Pedro 17:56, 22 May 2004 (UTC)
• I don't know why I kept passing this by. So I stopped, looked...and just kept looking at this article. Frankly, I don't know why this was put up for deletion. There are even plenty of Wikis to back up the terminology. Even if the software really is garbage, keep. - Lucky 6.9 23:37, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
• The software is not garbage. its the article! Now wikipedia is a database of Software? -Pedro 23:55, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
• Yeah, the article could be better. But it's a pretty good stub about what seems to be an important project in one of the world's largest cities. There have been a lot of arguments lately about posting subroutines and Linux commands as articles. Personally, I feel they don't belong here. This, IMO, does belong. A little cleanup wouldn't hurt, but I think it's serviceable as is. - Lucky 6.9 00:10, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, and hope somebody builds on it. Denni 00:23, 2004 May 25 (UTC)

---

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

---