Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microsoft Dinosaurs

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 Microsoft Home#Reference & Exploration software; clear consensus. (non-admin closure) Gong show 07:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Dinosaurs[edit]

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

No evidence it is notable. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 03:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 03:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 03:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Microsoft Home#Reference & Exploration software Old game definitely, but a redirect may be more appropriate here. Nate • (chatter) 07:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Microsoft Home#Reference & Exploration software. I'll go along with that. Deletion is OK, too. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Microsoft Home#Reference & Exploration software. A search turned up this article [1] and a few incidental mentions. One ref is not sufficient to establish notability apart from the larger software set, so I support the redirect proposal.Dialectric (talk) 02:52, 27 February 2014 (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.