Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Semantic gap

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. – AB CD 00:24, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Semantic gap

This article is fairly pointless. I think it should be moved to wiktionary if kept at all (personally, I'd just scrap it). Also, nothing links to it at all. --Vik Reykja ♬ 00:29, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Now it has an incoming link AND it's less pointless. Please reconsider. Ejrrjs | What? 01:58, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Keep Ejrrjs | What? 01:58, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep This is a good topic but must be re-written because it was entirely copied from the web, see here [1]. Paradiso 02:45, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It may be rewritten, but there is no must. There is a GFDL for it [here]. Ejrrjs | What? 06:17, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You sound like my grade three teacher. Paradiso 02:37, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I bet this is a bad thing, so I apologize. Just let me point out that the source and reference were already there. Ejrrjs | What? 06:24, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

But I liked my grade three teacher! :) Paradiso 07:43, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dicdef. Merge to relevant context (i.e. High-level language). Radiant _* 09:43, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Keep chris hathaway 20:03, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
Keep, but it sure needs work. I would bet that this term is a neoligism of sorts; the notion that knowledge is required to bridge disparate semantic systems of differing granularities is long established in the areas of linguistics and information science, though I don't know the specific jargon used in those disciplines for this concept. As an informatics scientist, I tend to refer to this as the "semantic mapping problem", which rears it's head practically every time you want to have two databases communicate with one another or two datasources of different origins but overlapping content reside in the same queriable space. Courtland 05:50, 2005 Apr 6 (UTC)
Keep but rework is needed. Pavel Vozenilek 17:35, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.