Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mercury Mail Transport System: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:25, 15 October 2018

Revision as of 14:33, 15 October 2018

Line 11:

* '''Merge''' into [[David Harris (software developer)]] - not significant enough for a stand alone article. [[User:NealeFamily|NealeFamily]] ([[User talk:NealeFamily|talk]]) 09:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

:* Be aware that that article too is up for deletion, unfortunately in some ways not part of that this as a [[WP:BUNDLE]]. You may wish to also explore the the other merge target I have suggested below.[[User:Djm-leighpark|Djm-leighpark]] ([[User talk:Djm-leighpark|talk]]) 09:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

* <s>'''Speedy keep'''</s>'''Keep''' [[WP:ATD]] as part of [[WP:BEFORE]] should have meant either the article was tagged or the merge of this MTA into the sister MUA [[Pegasus Mail]], but with the keep tagging for issues and optionally a merge proposal which can be sorted outside of AfD which is what is meant to happen. MTA entanglements are not my favourite pastime, MUAs being more use visible, but if this Mercury MTA relates to the mercury MTA at [[XAMPP]] then it probably should retain own article status. The harm caused by this article is minimal, the disruption to do a full investigation at AfD is significant and the timing is forced, and a proposal of a Merge in AfD requires the commitmnet to complete the merge promptly after AfD. However while I propose a speedy keep I am aware the conditions are unlikely to have been deemed to be met. I would therefore fallback to a keep with tagging and at worst a merge to [[Pegasus Mail]] however I am not in good faith able to give a 100% commitment I would complete the merge in that circumstance ... it is perhaps 60% chance I would complete it promptly. (Edit conflict prepping this message)[[User:Djm-leighpark|Djm-leighpark]] ([[User talk:Djm-leighpark|talk]]) 09:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

:* [http://community.pmail.com/forums/thread/38814.aspx This forum post] leads me to believe Mercury has a very significant role recently/currently? as the MTA in XAMPP. Together with its earlier role the 1990s? for Netware I am strongly recommending for a keep, though resources for that period will likely be offline and might need search of an archive like Bletchley Park. The Speedy Keep opportunity has passed and I am recommending keep with article tagging. While the Pegagsus Mail MUA and Mercury MTA are from the same stable and perhaps often used together and will often be applied separately also and because of different and non simple lifecycles and development are best kept separate.[[User:Djm-leighpark|Djm-leighpark]] ([[User talk:Djm-leighpark|talk]]) 14:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

* '''merge''' well as the nominator, I think now it should be merged into [[Pegasus Mail]], they have also a common web-site. [[User:Editor-1|Editor-1]] ([[User talk:Editor-1|talk]]) 10:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

* '''Keep''' or possibly '''merge''' into an appropriately-named article. I'm thinking of Mercury's historical importance, which unfortunately isn't reflected in the article at present. When Novell Netware was ''the'' networking system, before Microsoft had any network server capability, Mercury running on a Netware server as an NLM, together with Pegasus running on MS-DOS workstations, was a very usual mail system for both internal and external mail, maybe the principal or only one, I don't know—mail wasn't as important then as it is now, Mercury/Pegasus was a pioneer. A Windows network implementation followed much later. [[User:Pol098|Pol098]] ([[User talk:Pol098|talk]]) 11:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)