Bfs007

Javascript Data Components

Hi, The question really is to what extent they are actually currently in use - future plans don't count. Can you cite reference sites that are using the framework? Dlyons493 Talk 22:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I am pretty new to this...so i am not sure how to contact you.. Can you see this?

Anyway, there is a link to an active site in the bottom of the article(i added it today, before your comment actually, despite i thought it'd be bad since it has a few ads on it).

And why does future plans don't count? I'd say (if i was a potential developer) that it's an important part of each project to have plans for the future. Either way, isn't that a weird requirement?

The project have released three versions of source code and will continue. If i were you, i'd be cultivating more and wielding less.

To be honest, i just got back from a....binge of sorts... and is not really totally focused. So sorry 'bout....Whatever.

Hi, Yes I can see this but I'm logging off for the night now. You can leave a message on my talk page by clicking on the green/yellow talk above or below. You might be interested in reading WP:Verifiable and WP:Notability. It's nothing personal! Dlyons493 Talk 22:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Less drunk, using less obscure jokes, i am back :-)

Verifiability: It is verifiable. It's existance is an undeniable fact. I have, added a link to the Sourceforge project aswell. In doing this, the article reached the seldom encountered state of super-verifiable. :-)

Notability: A more tricky subject and maybe not an obviuos one, granted. But. After reading through the policy i'd like to say that:

• It is not an obscure topic. These components can be useful in practically all webpages. I am actually baffled that, in the midst of these AJAX-hyped days, there isn't already a huge open source project on this subject. There are small attempts, yes, but these are nowhere near JSDC in providing the functionality it does. And even less that it will do.
• It might not be known to many now, but that shouldn't automatically disqualify a subject. How, then, would information spread?
• I has a catchy abbreviation. Not as catchy as AJAX but more so than WYSIWYG.

Of course i am not taking it personal. How could i? We haven't even met :-)

Hi

Yes, its clearly verifiable - I wasn't being very clear there. What I meant is that future plans are inherently unverifiable (see WP:NOT, Crystal Ball). And Wiki records things that have already become notable rather than disseminating information about things that may/will become so. Like Life it rewards those that have already made it rather than helping those that need to :-)

Thanks for the extra info - I must say I have reservations about the whole AJAX-hype, let alone Javascript Data Components but let's see how the article evolves.

P.S. You can sign your postings by ending them with ~~~~ Dlyons493 Talk 11:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

But describing plans for the future is not looking into a crystal ball, is it? The plans exists right now and mentioning their existance would be stating a verifiable fact, wouldn't it? For example, the article on Google describes their partnership with NASA and their respective plans. The fact that those plans exists is a verifiable fact, as are those of our project.

Anyway, I just reworded it a little, removing that "the future holds".

Anything else? :-)

Bfs007 16:37, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

P.S. AJAX is really nothing new, it's just a new cool word. D.S.
P.P.S. Now the page diplays this weird error?? {{subst:empty template|You forgot to subst this template. Replace {{prod|whatever}} with {{subst:prod|whatever}}}} D.D.S.

Not sure what's happening there - I just tried a test edit on the page and it worked OK. Maybe a transient Wiki error? They do happen occasionally. P.S. I see your editing skills are coming on :-) There's a bit to learn but if you're involved in software it's relatively simple. Dlyons493 Talk 19:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok. So the article is still up for deletion even though i have corrected it? Now I'm a bit stumped...Was i completely out there on my last remark (the one above, that is) since you choose to not respond to it?

Bfs007 22:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The article is still up for deleteion because nobody has removed the {{prod}} tag. Have a read of Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion. I'm not going to remove the tag because I don't think the components are sufficiently notable to warrant an article, but if you wish to that's entirely your choice. I could then take the matter to the community via the AfD process but don't intend to. Of course, any other editor could at any time in the future decide to prod or AfD it themselves. But there's a lot of articles on Wiki and it could survive for a long time or forever - who knows! Dlyons493 Talk 12:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Since the existence- or non-existence of this article, after some discussion, has boiled down to subjective opinion, i removed the proposed deletion tag. I someone re-adds it, the debate will continue. But since it's just an article about a non-commercial sourceforge project, i think it might be quite safe. But i'll watch it, fiercely debating if someone dares to suggest any lack of grandure on either the part of the article or the project. :-)

Bfs007 16:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of JavaScript Data Components

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on JavaScript Data Components requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. StraussInTheHouse (talk) 12:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of JavaScript Data Components

The article JavaScript Data Components has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Proposing deletion, fails WP:NSOFT due to lack of significant coverage or major reviews.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StraussInTheHouse (talk) 12:48, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of JavaScript Data Components for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article JavaScript Data Components is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JavaScript Data Components until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SITH (talk) 11:32, 7 January 2019 (UTC)