Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windows 3.15


 * 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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Windows 3.15

 * — (View AfD)

Totally unsourced, basically nothing on Internet search engines about this, and frankly, it's news to me; I work on Microsoft Windows articles extensively, so surely I'd have heard of it by now. -/- Warren 23:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Contradicts sources stating that Windows 3.15 was a Japanese version of Windows 3.11. Themodernizer 00:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per no original research --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 02:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - WP:NOR, w/ zipo ghits. SkierRMH, 08:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Most likely a hoax FirefoxMan 12:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Abstain I'd like to know if this is real or not. Maybe some research is due. I asked the article's creator but they didn't answer. Anomo 13:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * See the article's talk page. Uncle G 19:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Links are dead. Anomo 03:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Precisely. Still planning to abstain? -/- Warren 06:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Original research. —ShadowHalo 06:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The article cites no sources. The URLs given on the article's talk page no longer work, but the pages are currently still cached by Google Web.  Pulling them up, it is clear that the articles linked to are actually talking about Windows 3.1J, and that the substitution of "5" for "J" is a transcription error of some kind.  None of the sources support the content of this article.  Unverifiable.  Delete. Uncle G 13:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax. Windows 3.15 was a Japanese version of Windows 3.11, a fact not even mentioned in passing in this article.  Neil916 (Talk) 18:44, 14 December 2006 (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.