Talk:FAT (reserved sectors)
 | This redirect was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion on May 3, 2013. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
 | Material from File Allocation Table was split to FAT (reserved sectors) on 2012 Feb 9. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:File Allocation Table. |
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Contested deletion[edit]
This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because... splitting topic File Allocation Table see Talk page --Hydradix (talk) 13:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, there is no consensus to split the article at this stage or in this way at all. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Contested deletion[edit]
This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because... (Its good for some computer techs.) --Bobherry talk 20:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Just for the records, the contents of *this* article is based on a copy & paste action from the corresponding technical section in the File Allocation Table article. I can assure you, we absolutely do not want to delete this highly valuable information, but as the contents here is a 100% duplication of the contents found in the main article, nothing gets lost if *this* split-off article gets deleted.
- We might need to split the original article into several subarticles at some stage, but so far there was no discussion nor consensus how exactly to do it. And given the fact, that there are uncountable internal and external #hashed links into the article and its subsection, this is non-trivial and needs to be very carefully planned and carried out in a non-destructive manner, not in an "over-night" ad-hoc split action. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)