This article was nominated for deletion on 2 March 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.
This article was nominated for deletion on May 232006. The result of the discussion was Speedily delete. WP:CSD A8 - blatant copyvio uploaded within the past 48 hours.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
What was deleted was an earlier version. This version has no copyvio, and has already been restored once after an earlier erroneous deletion. Furthermore, the deletion of the original article is under appeal with the admin responsible, as, though there was copyvio, the original article did not qualify for speedy deletion, but rather should have gone through the normal process, which would have allowed time for the uploader, who is the copyright holder, to correct the copyvio problems. MyPOV 11:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. No valid reason for move. (non-admin closure) – Ammarpad (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
– According to an internal decision made by the laboratory, the acronym should no longer be expanded since the ancient complete name is obsolete now. Silveryuan (talk) 00:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Silveryuan: I have contented this technical request, since it would require that both the new name be better than the current one (i.e. the general requirement for moving a page) in terms of matching what sources use, and that it be established that this is the primary topic for the new name. --DannyS712 (talk) 02:47, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
