Talk:Failure
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Failure article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep. |
- Archive 1 - archived top-of-page anti-bush political rhetoric. ---J.S (T/C) 21:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Page content seems confused
This page looks like it might be about engineering failure, indeed it is linked from other subjects on reliability, but it also contains some other concepts like failure as the opposite of success (e.g. failure to win a sporting tournament). It seems to me this page needs to be split into several disambiguated pages. Sangwine 12:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC) asd
"Failure" on Google
Many people have been offended and delighted by what seems like a politically slanted result on Google. The truth is that when you type in the word "failure" on the search bar for Google, George W. Bush's biography is the first result. To clear you mind and hear the facts on this matter, there is an article on Google concerning it. [1] --Mbobanda 16:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
whilst this is very entertaining, the fact doesn't really seem to me to be of merit to the article. Andyroo g 12:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- A glitch in (or abuse of) Google has nothing to do with the actual concept of "failure" - so lets drop it. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:29, 28 July 2007 (UTCld
Bush's biography and record of "success" should still be on this link, nothing could be more accurate.
- Wikipedia is not the place for political propaganda - Jaqel 17:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Version added
I added a translation at pt.wikipedia.org. Can an Administrator add "pt:Fracasso"? Thanks!
Al Lemos 21:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC) August 08 2007
Reference to ISO 10303-226: this standard has been withdrawn by ISO
Under heading "Formal technical definition", a reference is made to ISO 10303-226. However, conform the ISO TC184/SC4 committe, ISO 10303-226 has been withdrawn; see http://www.tc184-sc4.org/SC4%5FOpen/SC4%5FWork%5FProducts%5FDocuments/STEP%5F%2810303%29/200-299/documentation.cfm. I suggest to remove this reference.
Other Failures
Rolls-Royce uses the euphemism "failure to proceed" (or FTP) in place of "breakdown" whenever one of its vehicles fail to operate. This is presumably a position of pride that they take, that their automobiles never break down. Should this use be included in the article? - Loadmaster 21:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
This is not an encyclopedia entry, it's a definition
Wiktionary is for word definitions. I can't see anything in this article (or imagine anything new added to it) that would turn it into a wikipedia article on a person, place, or thing.
Failure is an abstract noun and doesn't need an encyclopedia entry. There are those who go about mercilessly deleting spurious Wikipedia pages, and I think they should check this one out. Deletionists, where are you now?
Steve Rapaport 20:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Collection of definitions
This actually is a collection of definitions, and a useful jump-point to several other wikipedia articles. The Wiktionary article on failure lists none of the information in this article and, by design, should not. That this article describes a somewhat abstract concept, and may not conform to your imagined structure of a wikipedia article, does not automatically make it a candidate for deletion. I believe it has enough valuable information, including links to related articles, that it should be preserved. Gladmax 12:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Reference
I can not find the book, the author, or the publisher BOOM, BUST, BANG! (Lansdowne)—can someone supply the source or the ISBN? DocWatson42 01:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)