Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surface Pro 4


 * 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 Microsoft Surface.  Sandstein  07:46, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Surface Pro 4

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As per WP:NOT Ians18 (talk) 07:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Three different tech/news websites are already provided that demonstrate notability for this upcoming device. WP:CRYSTAL states "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation." This article is not unverifiable speculation; rather, it is verifiable speculation. Point number 1 states "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." The three different sources are sufficient to demonstrate that the device and its future release are notable. Given that this is a Microsoft product that is provisionally scheduled to take place later this year, I believe that the device is indeed almost certain to be released. Actually, given the high profile of Microsoft and the potential interest in this device, I am inclined to think that even if the device is cancelled, its cancellation should be included in the article and the device would remain notable. Axl ¤ [Talk] 11:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Please see "Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors" and it clearly states "Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content." Ians18 (talk) 01:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete For goodness sakes... Clearly this is pure rumor. Not to mention the content is almost entirely pointless technically.  For example, "Surface Pro 4 will be run on Intel x86 Broadwell or Skylake i5 or i7 CPU."  That just about the entire list of realistically possible CPUs for ANY Intel-based system announced in the next year. So, not only is this entry entirely rumor, it's not even useful rumor.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.213.208 (talk) 14:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Possibly keep it as a redirect (to Microsoft Surface), but for now this article stands baseless, and even when the Microsoft Surface Hub was officially announced the article was deleted because there wasn't sufficient reporting on it, personally I want this page to stay, but it simply isn't accurate and is based on pure speculation. --LyThienDao1984 (talk) 06:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Though User:Axl makes a few very good points, so I think I'd go with keep if the sources are verified enough, but I'd remove the rumours on the specifications as that does fall under WP:CRYSTAL. --LyThienDao1984 (talk) 06:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 04:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep and redirect to Microsoft Surface. I believe it is logical that another version of the Surface Pro line is in the works, but as of now, this is pure speculation, which doesn't belong on Wikipedia. It would be profitable to maintain the history of this page for future recreation, in the event that it is officially announced and released. Otherwise, an article on the subject is not yet fully warranted. Thank you, --ceradon ( talk •  contribs ) 07:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Microsoft Surface. There is undoubtedly a good deal of media coverage on this, but certain information does not seem to be available. For instance, if you check the second page of results, there are articles stating that this product may never be released at all. Although, as Ceradon said above, it would be good to preserve the page's history in the event that the product is actually released, as of now it does not justify a separate article. -- Biblio worm   16:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Microsoft Surface for now. It almost certainly will be notable at some point, but not right now. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:09, 17 July 2015 (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.