Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DOS commands


 * 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The result was nomination withdrawn, according to the discussion and per WP:WITHDRAWN. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

List of DOS commands

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is pretty much a clear example of what a condensed manual looks like, thus it goes against WP:NOTHOWTO. As such, article might be compacted down to just a bulleted list of DOS commands, but that doesn't seem like something of usable value. Of course, moving the content to Wikiversity is a totally viable option. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think this would be best served as a WikiBook, but maybe someone else can suggest a better result. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment The form of List of Unix commands (big table plus one to two sentences of summary, links to separate articles if command is notable enough to have one) looks to be a suitable balance of weight and usability. There was a series of individual Unix command articles brought up to AfD, which can be good reference on how to deal with the sections.  野狼院 ひさし  Hisashi Yarouin 11:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with ; this page is not encyclopedic. But like my colleagues, I am looking for an alternative to straight-out deletion, like transwiki. I've recently nominated several articles (like DATE (command)) for deletion and achieved only relative success while suffering from the consequences of others assuming bad faith in me. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Please don't get me wrong, I'm always for doing something else instead of simply deleting an article.  suggested that we go with compacting the article into something similar to the List of Unix commands, and to me that's a great suggestion. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 21:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * If you never meant to delete the article, then this is the wrong forum for you buddy. If no outstanding delete !votes, how about closing this and start an discussion/RFC at the article talk to carry on with the conversion?  野狼院 ひさし  Hisashi Yarouin 01:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Totally agreed. I've jumped the gun by spitting out this AfD nomination a bit too quickly, but now I'd say that the article is a keeper –  especially after the work done by  in the last couple of days.  I'd like to invite everyone to join a further discussion at . &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:29, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment – I see the message "The article DATE (command) was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 03 October 2014 with a consensus to merge the content into List of DOS commands" on the talk page. Why would y'all come to a consensus to "merge" to an article that you just want to delete? That sounds like a waste of time. You could just merge them all to a new article Computers perform tasks by responding to commands, delete that, and just get back to documenting every last episode of The Simpsons in detail. I guess Fox never wrote a The Simpsons manual. Wbm1058 (talk) 12:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep I went through the article and deleted the content that looked like manual, howto-like material. What is left is a reasonably well-formed list-based article of DOS commands, and short descriptions thereof, with DOS as the parent article. The descriptions could be improved and filled out, but I consider the prose encyclopedic in tone. "MS-DOS" gets 755,000 hits in Google books; the subject is immensely notable and there exists copious documentation out there to support descriptions, history and impact of the commands in the list. Most books on DOS I have seen, especially those on batch programming, discuss the DOS commands as a list, hence, the list of commands is also very likely to be notable. Many of the commands are already supported by main articles. Some commands could use sources, but this is a surmountable problem, per WP:SURMOUNTABLE, and not a reason for deletion. A highly notable topic for the parent article, and a well-formed list, per WP:LISTN and WP:SAL, suggest keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 4 October 2014 (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.