Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Single choice principle

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Don't repeat yourself. EdJohnston (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Single choice principle

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There seems to be little [1] independent coverage of this principle. Pcap ping 20:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 20:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Don't repeat yourself, until there's significant content? However, if you want to keep it, here's a second source: pages Page 61-63 of Object Oriented Software Construction (2nd ed.) by Bertrand Meyer (at least according to http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/meyer1.htm#singlechoice aka http://www.reocities.com/tablizer/meyer1.htm#singlechoice ) Again, same author. But this seems to be a popular phrase in CS class discussions of architecture, whether or not Eiffeil is discussed. Could also be listed as a design principle for object oriented design. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 21:22, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above. -- samj _in ^out 01:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.