Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cassette tape (obsolete)

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:12, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cassette tape (obsolete)[edit]

[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)

I don't see a reason to have this article. It basically says that there are many different types of cassette tape, and then links out to some external pages. Either it's redundant to cassette tape (disambiguation) or the information can be added to cassette tape. ... discospinster _talk 16:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. ... discospinster _talk 16:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -KAP03 (^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 18:51, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ill-considered content fork from Cassette tape or whatever it's called this week. If K-Tel sent you an album on "cassette tape", it was going to be on something compliant with the PHillips Compact Cassette standard, not some weird data storage device. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:38, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As stated above, this article is redundant. Any useful content should be sent over to 'cassette tape' with this being deleted. I also wouldn't support a redirect given the oddity of the '(obsolete)' disambiguator. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the reasons mentioned above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreamanderson (talk • contribs)
Comment The Cassette tape has the hatnote "This article is about the Compact Cassette invented by Philips. For other audio, video and data tape cassette formats, see List of cassette tape formats." which renders it unsuitable for discussion of anything other than the compact cassette. The article List of cassette tape formats and Cartridge#Media DAB between them cover most stuff. This is sufficently obscure to delete but I haven't checked if any associated references or history could be leveraged elsewhere usefully.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:22, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It seems the page author is well intentioned per the brief talk page discussion on this matter. However, Wikipedia is not a directory. According to the talk page discussion, this article appears to be created to direct readers via external links to various types of cassette tapes. So, in this way it is content forking of the disambiguation page. Also, the result is, this page preempts general notability criteria for articles by directing the reader to off-wiki sites to read about cassette tapes. Wikipedia is not a link farm. Perhaps the author can create pages on notable cassette types rather than creating pages like this. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Page serves no purpose. I think its creator would have been better off adding content - even a new section, if needs be - to Magnetic tape instead. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:06, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nomination. Honestly, it would have been better to discuss this somewhere beforehanded, and figure out if there's a better way to handle this than creating a new article. That's why talk pages and Wiki-projects exists, so we can avoid stumbling around and creating articles haphazardly. - BilCat (talk) 01:44, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I see no need for having this page, when all info can be part of Cassette tape (disambiguation). Expertwikiguy (talk) 18:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Content from Cassette tape (obsolete) has been copied/merged to Cassette and cartridge tapes by Tom94022 [1] which ordinarily would leave a need to retain this in some form for attribution or require a histmerge? however if I am correct Tom94022 has copied only content originated by himself so on that basis there is not need to retain for attribution though anyone reading summary on the above diff would likely call for a restore for attribution purposes ... possibly on talk page of Cassette and cartridge tapes. Closer should note this. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2020 (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.