Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Push Notification


 * 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 push technology.  MBisanz  talk 23:32, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Push Notification

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I think this article should be merged with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notification_service to make one full article, rather than two stub articles about the same thing. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 19:19, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 08:15, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 08:15, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Cabayi (talk) 08:15, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - aren't there countless of notification services / ways to notify many users at once while push notification is a specific type of said? --Fixuture (talk) 22:32, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge TomStar81 (Talk) 12:26, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge with Another Article At least two other articles, Notification service and Push technology, are good canditates for merge. Take your pick. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 11:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep There is sufficient coverage of this topic as well as ongoing academic discussion of various push notification systems and technologies (GScholar results) which can be used as a basis for this article. High beam shows lots of ongoing research and patents so sources on the basic/general techinolgy are very likely to exist per WP:NEXIST. Should not be merged because Notification service seems to include not only push technology but things like Reverse 911 and EMWIN. J bh  Talk  15:47, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Push technology may be a valid merge target instead. J bh  Talk  17:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I was going to suggest that, but Push technology is kind of confusing, so I couldn't really get a clear understanding of it. Maybe I'm just tired but if you think that it fits, then you can make your decision. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 11:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, did you know that the page won't link if you capitalize the 't' in 'technology'? UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 11:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Articles are titled in sentence case ie "Push technology" rather than "Push Technology" or "push technology" however it is possible to create a WP:REDIRECT by creating a one line article consisting of  with an alternate spelling, or alternate name which will then be linkable. If there is no redirect and it is not appropriate to/you do not want to make one it is possible to pipe the display text -   --> arbitrary text.  J bh  Talk  12:45, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Your welcome &#124; Democratics Talk 10:27, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge into push technology it already is mostly examples, just add this one. NOT HOWTO W Nowicki (talk) 22:42, 28 October 2016 (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.