Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ipv16

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 SPEEDY DELETED. — brighterorange (talk) 19:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ipv16[edit]

I originally PRODed this and Ipv8 per deletion as WP:CRYSTAL but after a quick search, I am uncertain whether it should be deleted or not. VivioFateFan ^{(Talk, Sandbox)} 14:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating: Ipv8 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for the reasons I mentioned above.

1024-bit delete. Wow. Major canse of crystalballery, and the only claim to notability for IPv8 is that it uses an address that is 43 bytes (a prime number, of all things) long and that it was suggested on a mailing list! Um, no! --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 15:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete both as OR without the R. Actually Ipv16 can surely be speedied for lack of context. — brighterorange (talk) 17:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Good call on Ipv16. So tagged. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 18:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also got Ipv8 for nocontent - what's there is sort of an idea of how to create an IP address scheme using 43 bits. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 18:56, 18 January 2008 (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.