Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AutoCAD version history

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 redirect‎ to AutoCAD version history. There is a rough consensus below not to retain (between delete and merge/redirect). Paianis executed a merge of relevant information, so closing as redirect to preserve the history. Daniel (talk) 00:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AutoCAD version history[edit]

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

AutoCAD version history (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Exhaustive list of software updates without any meaningful context/content about updates. List fails NLIST, WP:NOTCHANGELOG. Any appropriate version history could be easily accomodated in the AutoCAD#Version history section of the main article. This version history appears to be a split from the main.  // Timothy :: talk  22:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1) The changelog is long and extensive enough the main article could absolutely do without it 2) all the differences in revisions can be found - a) changelogs are hard or impossible to find specially for older versions b) The list contains info which is nowhere to find on the Autocad's website: the DWG tag which specifies save format broad compatibility c) I spent a considerable amount of time/did a lot of research to establish OS compatibility for older versions (which exists only in printed-then-scanned old computer magazines found of books google com). This information is completely missing on the website. In fact the website contains information only for the past limited number of releases, but not for any older releases.

<Offtopic-rant> In the end I don't care about this "Deletion" process. I've noticed that in wikipedia it is disproportionally skewed depending on whether the subject is currently relevant/hot or not. If it's not relevant/new/fresh enough, articles are deleted without any second thoughts just because the number of active WP editors willing to delete anything under any pretense is a lot higher than the number of people interested in a particular narrow/historical issue. The fact this article has caught someone's attention is already alarming in itself. This means someone is scavenging Wikipedia trying to exercise their ability and right to delete someone's hard work.

Imagine I was away from keyboard, dead, sick or anything else which would prevent me from chiming in. No voice, no opinion, "OK, let's delete it". </Offtopic-rant> Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 16:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep without prejudice to merging. The article is not long and there is no reason to scrub this information from Wikipedia. Srnec (talk) 01:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Though there must be some potential to merge some content to main article. TheRollBoss001 (talk) 18:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Re: merging. I have no objection to a merge in principle, but I couldn't see any material in the article worth merging. The opening two paragraphs contain info already in the main article AutoCAD. This leaves the table, I think the major points that might be merged again are already in the target (imo), I personally don't think a merge would improve the target (imo), but it also wouldn't hurt, so if there is a consensus that some of the info should be merged into the appropriate section, I have no objection.  // Timothy :: talk  18:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: WP:NOTCHANGELOG: Exhaustive logs of software updates. Use reliable third-party (not self-published or official) sources in articles dealing with software updates to describe the versions listed or discussed in the article. Common sense must be applied regarding the level of detail to include. A list of every version/beta/patch is inappropriate. Consider a summary of development instead. बिनोद थारू (talk) 01:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Merge - per WP:NOTCHANGELOG as above. Article relies a lot on primary sources from Autodesk and is just a list of all versions. If you think this is really important information I'd merge it with the AutoCAD article. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 01:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I've moved across most information I felt was relevant for the AutoCAD article. I'm content with this page being deleted if there are no objections as to my edits. Paianis (talk) 14:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. It looks like a partial Merge was done by an editor arguing for Deletion before this AFD was closed and I just would like to see if others agree with this act and if it changes anyone's opinion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think WP:NOTCHANGELOG applies here as it's a list of versions over 20-30 years, which is encyclopaedic information. I'm just not sure if WP:OR applies or not, or if this is a valid WP:SPLIT. It's potentially merge-able back to the main article, though. SportingFlyer T·C 07:37, 8 January 2024 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/AutoCAD_version_history&oldid=1194435959"