Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of video players (software)


 * 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 Comparison of media players. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-19 12:07Z 

List of video players (software)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Reason Commilito 12:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC) The article Comparison_of_media_players has all the players in this list included (at least all the "blue" ones ) and many more. Also the comparison gives you much more information and a better overview. So I don't think we need two articles for a summary of media player, especially not an incomplete one like that.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 19:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Comparison of media players, as that page is much more useful and includes all the relevant info already. JulesH 20:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete not important list. --MaNeMeBasat 15:14, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a good linkspam free list (internal links only). So instead of deleting this fine list why don't you guys me help out with the cleaning up of the linkspam entrenched List of video editing software. I need help with that list since everytime I clean it up the spammers come back and out number me.  Also redirecting to Comparison of media players isn't a great idea since it is a monster of a table that will likely be deleted in the future. (Requestion 21:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC))


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks,  Nish kid 64  18:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge with List of media players. Article appears to have been split off from there in the first place; it's not really big enough to need a separate article – Qxz 20:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Requestion. Mathmo Talk 08:58, 15 February 2007 (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.