Talk:Datagram service

Merge destination re-proposed
Is Datagram service only applicable when describing Internet Protocol? If so, shouldn't the general scope of this article be merged and redirected to Internet Protocol? If not, shouldn't this article be merged with Datagram? It seems that the Datagram service and Datagram socket articles are splitting hairs, dividing the subject unnecessarilly. For example, the Datagram socket article does not distiguish itself from any other kind of Internet socket. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 17:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think, "Datagram service" and "Datagram" is essentially the same topic (we refer to a packet as a datagram because it complies to a datagram protocol), but socket is a concept of API, not networking. "Datagram socket" should be merged with "network socket". Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I am of the opinion that Datagram should be the landing article for people wishing to read about Datagram service, since the former receives nearly 20 times more viewership than the latter. Network socket receives even more readers than Datagram, so I would agree with Incnis Mrsi that Datagram socket should merge into Network socket.  We need to make articles readable and findable for Wikipedia users, and on such esoteric subjects as these, I think it's better to expand heavily-used articles with sections, rather than distribute content across too many spin-off articles of less merit and visibility. TechyOne (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC)