Talk:no coupling

RFD discussion: August–September 2017

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

no coupling

"(computing) the case when two modules are not coupled at all". Well that's just... no coupling. Like a recipe in cooking might have "no cheese". Equinox ◑ 20:33, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

uncoupled ? W3ird N3rd (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

This seems to be about w:Coupling_(computer_programming)#Types_of_coupling. W3ird N3rd (talk) 20:51, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I'm a programmer in real life. This really doesn't strike me as a phrase that belongs in a dictionary. Equinox ◑ 21:33, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

I sometimes feel the same way about some words I encounter here in my mother tongue, but when I look them up it turns out they do exist. If "no coupling" as stated in that list is used as a term (and can't just be substituted for "uncoupled") it could be valid. (I don't know if it actually is) W3ird N3rd (talk) 22:11, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Knowing the editor who created the entry, I would say they don't know if it actually is, either: they are simply unable to recognize a sum-of-parts phrase when they see it. Anything they encounter in their line of work (programming) that doesn't get out of the way fast enough gets made into an entry- they have over 900 deleted edits, of which at least a couple hundred are creations of new entries that have since been deleted. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:38, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Also a programmer IRL, I have never come across this. It doesn't make much sense to me. I would just delete it. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:10, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 16:09, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

• Delete per nom; no keeping. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:11, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
• RFD failed. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)