Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windows.pas


 * 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 API. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Windows.pas

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, virtually untouched for 6 years. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 20:21, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:34, 17 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  20:07, 23 November 2013 (UTC)




 * Merge to windows.h. I could find no secondary sources for this Pascal language binding to the Windows API. But it exists and is verifiable, so is worth the one sentence merge into it's more notable cousin, the C binding API windows.h. --Mark viking (talk) 22:36, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that's appropriate. But I can't come up with anything better.  I've been leaning toward deletion since I this the first time, but I just can't decide. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:51, 25 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I just added a reference. But as far as I can tell, there is nothing more to say about windows.pas than the two sentences in the article. So, the topic fails the "significant coverage" test of WP:GNG. Merging sounds like a good idea. —Ben Kovitz (talk) 02:32, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with NinjaRobotPirate that a merge to windows.h is not fitting (completely different programming languages). So maybe a Merge to Windows API is a better alternative. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Merging to Windows API seems like the best idea yet. —Ben Kovitz (talk) 18:42, 29 November 2013 (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.