The result was no consensus. the reason for not re-nominating immediately after a non-consensus close is that a reasonable interval offers a better chance for consensus to form; this is an example--we are no nearer consensus this time. I'd suggest waiting at least a month to see if there are improvements. DGG ( talk) 23:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
See WP:Articles for deletion/SureClick—while SureClick was straightened out, this article was not. Copyvio, nonsense, copy & paste from other articles, irrelevant tangents, and "under construction." Dori ( Talk • Contribs) 22:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC) reply
IMO, Automated Tissue Image Systems has more issues than SureClick did, and needs at least 90% of its text cut to be worth keeping. Unfortunately, it's written so randomly that I can't tell which parts (if any) are worth keeping. And with copyvio issues, I'd rather we got rid of it entirely than keep it around in the hopes that someday, someone might take action to clean it up. Dori ( Talk • Contribs) 00:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC) replyI've removed all the things that have only tangential references to the subject. These include 90% of the text, as there were entire FDA regulation texts and manuals on product testing and complaint processes. I can only hope that these were copyvio, cause otherwise the writer has real issues.
← Check my prune, though, please. I hacked most of the article away. Most of the article was too detailed about the technical parts of the system and the microscopes which are not what the system is about, it's mostly about its software, but it requires the high end digital micrograph acquisition and processing systems. Their details belong in their articles. -- KP Botany ( talk) 00:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC)-- KP Botany ( talk) 00:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. the reason for not re-nominating immediately after a non-consensus close is that a reasonable interval offers a better chance for consensus to form; this is an example--we are no nearer consensus this time. I'd suggest waiting at least a month to see if there are improvements. DGG ( talk) 23:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply
See WP:Articles for deletion/SureClick—while SureClick was straightened out, this article was not. Copyvio, nonsense, copy & paste from other articles, irrelevant tangents, and "under construction." Dori ( Talk • Contribs) 22:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC) reply
IMO, Automated Tissue Image Systems has more issues than SureClick did, and needs at least 90% of its text cut to be worth keeping. Unfortunately, it's written so randomly that I can't tell which parts (if any) are worth keeping. And with copyvio issues, I'd rather we got rid of it entirely than keep it around in the hopes that someday, someone might take action to clean it up. Dori ( Talk • Contribs) 00:08, 22 March 2009 (UTC) replyI've removed all the things that have only tangential references to the subject. These include 90% of the text, as there were entire FDA regulation texts and manuals on product testing and complaint processes. I can only hope that these were copyvio, cause otherwise the writer has real issues.
← Check my prune, though, please. I hacked most of the article away. Most of the article was too detailed about the technical parts of the system and the microscopes which are not what the system is about, it's mostly about its software, but it requires the high end digital micrograph acquisition and processing systems. Their details belong in their articles. -- KP Botany ( talk) 00:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC)-- KP Botany ( talk) 00:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC) reply