Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RTP payload formats: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→RTP payload formats: Reply |
Propose to rename |
||
Line 14:
::My only comment here (until now) has purely been deletion sorting; I have (and had) no opinion on the article. It is [[User:Anonrfjwhuikdzz|Anonrfjwhuikdzz]] that says that material at the main article — which I will note is [[Real-time Transport Protocol]] — is sufficient. '''[[User:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">WC</span>''<span style="color:#999933">Quidditch</span>'']]''' [[User talk:Wcquidditch|<span style="color:red">☎</span>]] [[Special:Contribs/Wcquidditch|<span style="color:#999933">✎</span>]] 10:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
::I would be find with a redirect instead of deletion. I'm not convinced and exhaustive list is appropriate for wikipedia as we're not supposed to be a directory/catalog --- that's a job for the RFC series. [[User:Anonrfjwhuikdzz|Anonrfjwhuikdzz]] ([[User talk:Anonrfjwhuikdzz|talk]]) 23:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
:::The RFC Editor only lists all RFCs and makes them available. It is not a function of the RFC Editor to present overviews per subject of any kind. The overview presented in [[RTP payload formats]], compiled by many editors, stands on its own and has become a ''de facto'' source on the subject. This is reflected in the number of visitors of the page. Deletion would be a disservice to the public, IMHO; a rename better reflects the nature of the article.— [[User:Dandorid|<i><sub><u>D</u></sub><sup><b>a</b></sup><small>n</small><sub><u>d</u></sub><sup><b>o</b></sup><small>r</small><sup><b>i</b></sup><sub><u>D</u></sub></i>]] ([[User Talk:Dandorid|talk]]) 07:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
| |||