Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opera build releases
- 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. NawlinWiki 06:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Deproded with a explanation in the talk page.[1] However, what the most recent weekly is and what build they are using, to know what they are using. and This article was intended to make it easier for weekly testers. is not really a good inclusion threshold for Wikipedia. Prod reason was This list is not encyclopedic. Per Wikipedia is not a directory, [...] there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic, for example Nixon's Enemies List. There is nothing famous about each of these entries. We are basically replicating the information found at snapshot.opera.com/windows Even if the article could include information about each of the build to convert it into an article, I still doubt the entry would be encyclopedic. Requesting comments from the community. -- ReyBrujo 03:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Addenum: As this can be considered the article creator's first big good faithed contribution, I would appreciate the community to give insight about other guidelines or policies this article may not be respecting, and precedents if possible. Thanks. -- ReyBrujo 04:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete Complete listcruft. Elomis 03:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Please note that Wikipedia:Listcruft is an essay and not a guideline or policy.--TBCΦtalk? 04:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Edit conflict delete per nom. - Mike | Happy Thanksgiving 03:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:NOT a mirror for release dates. --Daniel Olsen 03:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Um, using Wikipedia as an up-to-date source? Um, no. I'm going to suggest to the article creator that they try Blogger.com or some other site. FrozenPurpleCube 04:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as Wikipedia is not a directory.--TBCΦtalk? 04:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, it's always nice when people wnat to add information, but this is of interest only to a small group of fans/testers, and almost immediately obsolete. --Dhartung | Talk 06:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, non-encyclopedic list. Wikipedia is not a release date list. JIP | Talk 07:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. --Kf4bdy talk contribs 23:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.