Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Development of Windows 95


 * 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   merge to Windows 95. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Development of Windows 95

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Lacks references. Source mentioned on talk page is a blog, not a [WP:RS

Linuxlove8088 (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Comment right well, that i'll remove. as for references, the only otehr site that i can find with windows chicago listed thourgholy are the three entrires at this link: http://toastytech.com/guis/indexwindows.html other than that, there is no place that has chicago talked about as good as toastytech. and for windows memphis, theres a little more, but not much more than win chicago. it's not my fault that no one cares about old, buggy beta software.


 * Redirect/merge with windows 95. Ikip (talk) 01:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * redirecting windows chicago page to windows 95? i would prefer merging the chicago page into windows 95 rather then have my articlce lost for all eternity :/

Linuxlove8088 (talk) 01:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There are 2 types of redirect/merge, one keeps the history, one deletes the history and redirects the page. I think the history should be kept. Ikip (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why? Is there valuable information in the history?--RadioFan (talk) 12:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * merge We just need to specify merge, the redirect is automatic and required to preserve the history. Should have been in main article from the start.    DGG ( talk ) 02:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge into Windows 95. TomCat4680 (talk) 03:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment merge? meh, go ahead just don't fully delete my article :\ Linuxlove8088 (talk) 03:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Just to be clear, it's not your article.--RadioFan (talk) 12:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

sorry, i'm still a newb to wikipedia stuff.Linuxlove8088 (talk) 16:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I suggest using the term "!my article" when referring to an article you wrote ;-) --Kjetil_r 19:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Or "my !article" to be really controversial and confusing. Greg Tyler (t &bull; c) 23:08, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Windows 95. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 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.