Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RTP payload formats: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→RTP payload formats: Reply |
No edit summary |
||
Line 26:
:::Outside of the opening summary there is not much providing context for the protocols. I don't understand the reasoning from @[[User:Dandorid|Dandorid]] that the table provides context or explanation to these protocols. These are just very basic summaries of the protocol specifications from my reading, but where is the context about development and uses that makes these entries something more than [[WP:NOTPLOT]]? Similar summary information seems to be available through IANA, so why not just link to their website in the main RTP protocol article for people with further interest? The only parts of the table that provided additional context were certain descriptions detailing changes in payload type/the reasons for reserved blocks but those specific instances could easily be added to the prose at [[Real-time Transport Protocol#Profiles and payload formats]].
::*All of that said, I do want to change my vote to '''redirct''' with the target being the most appropriate section of [[Real-time Transport Protocol]]. [[User:Anonrfjwhuikdzz|Anonrfjwhuikdzz]] ([[User talk:Anonrfjwhuikdzz|talk]]) 02:04, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
*Either '''Keep''' or '''Merge''' with some other article, but absolutely don't delete the content. This article just helped me out today. [[User:Félix An|Félix An]] ([[User talk:Félix An|talk]]) 05:49, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
| |||