Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IOS version history (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:52, 14 May 2023

IOS version history

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article goes against current wikipedia policy on titled : What Wikipedia is not in specfic section it states that wikipedia is not a change log.

WP:NOT

WP:NOTCHANGELOG. 1keyhole (talk) 00:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 03:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - While the article does include some information that would perhaps fall under WP:NOTCHANGELOG, the article also contains history of the changes of the software written in prose that goes far beyond a simple changelog. Describing and detailing the version history of a given piece of software is not in itself a WP:NOTCHANGELOG issue. - Aoidh (talk) 04:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with Aoidh. Aintabli (talk) 05:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Lightburst (talk) 14:04, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable operating system and Aoidh makes a good case for how this article is a "history of the changes of the software written in prose" so that WP:NOT does not apply. Lightburst (talk) 14:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - Along with Firefox version history and Chrome version history, this article contains a large amount of useful historical info about a highly notable topic (iOS) that would be too bulky to fully include in the main article, making a spinoff page appropriate here. --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 18:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep There is literally nothing wrong with this article. It is very useful, and it should not be removed. Ghostlystatic (talk) 19:56, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As several others have suggested, this page in it's entirety is extremely useful. This page has been active for YEARS and is not bothering anyone. If you don't want detailed information, then simply don't click on [show] and nothing detailed will be shown. It's as simple as that. If we delete this page then where does it end? Are we going to delete all the other pages with Version History? This is Wikipedia, people come here for information! LESS is NOT MORE in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShockingOutcome (talk • contribs) 19:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Being useful is not a valid arguement 1keyhole (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is, considering it has been around for almost two decades. Ghostlystatic (talk) 21:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's ridiculous. The usefulness of an article's information is absolutely one of the factors that has to be considered when nominating an existing page for deletion. --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 08:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would sugguest you read Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions as it clearly states that being useful is not arguement for keeping article.

Please also remember that Consensus is not based on a tally of votes, but on reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments. 1keyhole (talk) 13:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is also important to read WP:USEFUL in its entirety because it doesn't quite say "that being useful is not arguement for keeping article". While "it's useful" by itself may not be a valid argument, "it's useful because of X" can be. If reasons are given, "usefulness" can be the basis of a valid argument for inclusion. An encyclopedia should, by definition, be informative and useful to its readers. Those arguing for its usefulness might consider elaboration on why it is useful. - Aoidh (talk) 19:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per above and arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Google Chrome version history (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firefox version history (2nd nomination), uncertain why this editor didn't do a multi-nom, as multiple separate discussions around largely the same issue seems very disruptive. —Locke Cole • t • c 21:56, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know you could do mutiple nomination thank you for telling me. 1keyhole (talk) 22:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, this helped me so much just today in making a buying decision. Félix An (talk) 09:43, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per @Aoidh and @Lightburst; article provides a useful summary of the changes made to iOS in prose. Willsteve2000 (talk) 07:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's clearly an encyclopedic topic for software such as Firefox. Should be cutdown some but we can use Common sense as mentioned at WP:NOTCHANGELOG (same rationale as on the on-going AfDs: Firefox, Chrome, and iOS). Skynxnex (talk) 23:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per Aoidh and for the same reason I expressed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firefox 2. Dawnbails (talk) 12:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep for all the reasons I gave at WP:Articles for deletion/Firefox version history (2nd nomination) (I'll spare everyone a second recitation.) I would add that this article is substantially better organized than the Firefox one, and a lot of it is most definitely not a changelog. In particular, this article provides a contextual index letting visitors reach the main articles for each iOS version, like iOS 12. The version/device support tables are invaluable and excellent work that should remain on Wikipedia. – The Fiddly Leprechaun · Catch Me! 15:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per DRV result, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 April#26 April 2023.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 16:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per all above. Any concerns involving WP:NOTCHANGELOG can be addressed via cleanup rather than deletion. Please see WP:SURMOUNTABLE. Frank Anchor 17:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per the reasons provided by Aoidh Jack4576 (talk) 18:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per Aoidh reasoning, and the fact that i have put significant effort personally into making the overviews far less exhaustive. yes WP:NOTCHANGELOG exists but it specifically applies to exhaustive changelogs. If effort can be put in to condense the overviews (as seen with the entirety of the iOS 12 section where one line sentences are used instead of an exhaustive overview for each release), there is no valid reason why I can fathom voting delete on this article, especially not after the amount of time that has passed and the significant amount of time and effort that has been put into this article. I honestly believe the previous closure per WP:SNOW pre-relist was the right move here, same as with the previous nomination. Topic itself is notable, and receives significant coverage as well, people just need to start citing what they add. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 18:21, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And @1keyhole, WP:NOTCHANGELOG states that articles should not be exhaustive change logs of software updates. Theres nothing wrong with having version history articles so long as they aren't significantly verbose or list every little change or bug fix made to a version and only list the most notable changes with significant sourcing (as it is correct in that Wikipedia should not be a comprehensive changelog, for that people can view the official release notes or if a piece of software is immensely popular but is open source, the git commit log) and that can be done with the iOS version history article. I honestly suggest withdrawing this AfD nomination due to the sheer amount of edits that have been made since this AfD was listed, including the removal of device codes along with build numbers and codenames from the tables, not to mention significant effort was made on my part so far to reduce the exhaustiveness of the feature overviews to where the article went from over 318,000 bytes to slightly above 277,000 bytes. This article has genuinely been valuable to a lot of people as well, and while saying this results in WP:ITSPOPULAR or WP:ITSUSEFUL being applied, it is clear that it is an encyclopedic article, as its not just tables, its also prose (and the prose can be expanded to be more encyclopedic as well), and like I mentioned it is a significantly notable topic - there are a lot of publications that cover every iOS release, including the patch releases. This article also receives a significant amount of pageviews. Therefore I am re-inforcing my keep. Listing an article for deletion basically implies that an article can not be improved. You are severely misinterpreting the policy by saying that Wikipedia is not a changelog, however that is not what the policy states. It states that Wikipedia is not an exhaustive changelog, and that if articles do focus on it, to provide singificant sourcing and common sense to the amount of detail that should be included in articles. This AfD is a genuine misinterpretation of WP:NOTCHANGELOG. - Evelyn Marie (leave a message · contributions) 18:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep Notable and content too large to fit on iOS article. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 18:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a reason for keeping (the original reason for deletion had nothing to do with notability, and the proposal is that the content be deleted entirely, not merged). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With over 200 references, many GNG quality, and a very clear and concise, well formatted article, this is a keep. And it's been snowing for weeks. Reversing the close at DRV and relisting it yet again, was a poor decision, given the snow; seems to be a case where IAR was called for, so as not to waste people's time with the needless relist. Nfitz (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep without the tables, as a valid summary article of subarticles such iPhone OS 1, iPhone OS 2, etc. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 :And @[[User:1keyhole|1keyhole]], WP:NOTCHANGELOG states that articles should not be {{tq|exhaustive change logs of software updates}}. Theres nothing wrong with having version history articles so long as they aren't significantly verbose or list every little change or bug fix made to a version and only list the most notable changes with significant sourcing (as it is correct in that Wikipedia should not be a comprehensive changelog, for that people can view the official release notes or if a piece of software is immensely popular but is open source, the [[git]] commit log) and that can be done with the iOS version history article. I honestly suggest withdrawing this AfD nomination due to the sheer amount of edits that have been made since this AfD was listed, including the removal of device codes along with build numbers and codenames from the tables, not to mention significant effort was made on my part so far to reduce the exhaustiveness of the feature overviews to where the article went from over 318,000 bytes to slightly above 277,000 bytes. This article has genuinely been valuable to a lot of people as well, and while saying this results in [[WP:ITSPOPULAR]] or [[WP:ITSUSEFUL]] being applied, it is clear that it is an encyclopedic article, as its not just tables, its also prose (and the prose can be expanded to be more encyclopedic as well), and like I mentioned it is a significantly notable topic - there are a lot of publications that cover every iOS release, including the patch releases. This article also receives a significant amount of pageviews. Therefore I am re-inforcing my keep. Listing an article for deletion basically implies that an article can not be improved. You are severely misinterpreting the policy by saying that Wikipedia is not a changelog, however that is not what the policy states. It states that Wikipedia is not an exhaustive changelog, and that if articles do focus on it, to provide singificant sourcing and common sense to the amount of detail that should be included in articles. This AfD is a genuine misinterpretation of [[WP:NOTCHANGELOG]]. - [[User:Evelyn Marie|Evelyn Marie]] ([[User_talk:Evelyn Marie|leave a message]] · [[Special:Contributions/Evelyn Marie|contributions]]) 18:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 *'''Strong keep''' Notable and content too large to fit on [[iOS]] article. [[User:GoldenBootWizard276|GoldenBootWizard276]] ([[User talk:GoldenBootWizard276|talk]]) 18:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
+*: This is not a reason for keeping (the original reason for deletion had nothing to do with notability, and the proposal is that the content be deleted entirely, not merged). [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 03:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' With over 200 references, many GNG quality, and a very clear and concise, well formatted article, this is a keep. And it's been snowing for weeks. Reversing the close at DRV and relisting it yet again, was a poor decision, given the snow; seems to be a case where IAR was called for, so as not to waste people's time with the needless relist. [[User:Nfitz|Nfitz]] ([[User talk:Nfitz|talk]]) 22:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
+* '''Keep''' [[Special:PermaLink/1154666289|without the tables]], as a valid [[Wikipedia:Summary style|summary article]] of subarticles such [[iPhone OS 1]], [[iPhone OS 2]], etc. [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 03:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)