Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Full operating capability

Full operating capability

[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)

DoD acronym. Wikipedia is not a manual. Fails WP:NOT.

Addendum:86% copyvio. scope_creep^Talk 23:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is actually a key issue for military programs across the western world, and there's a large literature on the topic. Nick-D (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Operational definition, in a new section Operational definition#Military (while sticking to non-copyvio sources). There is no need to create new articles for every term if the articles are stubs. They can always be split out later. Buckshot06 (talk) 00:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also Comment: Initial operating capability ought to be considered alongside this article for any changes required to it. Buckshot06 (talk) 00:26, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know the point is kind of moot since the AfD can be closed now, but we speedy delete copyvios, and all rights reserved is pretty clear cut as being not a Wikipedia-compatible licence. The content can't be merged, except for half a sentence about how it's "usually preceded by an IOC phase". Most we can do is delete and redirect. Alpha3031 (t • c) 03:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alpha3031: Yip. Indeed. I never checked for copyvio until I posted it, as I would have speedied it myself. There seems to some use for the term, so I guess a full article will arrive at some point, if somebody wants to do it. I will need to be deleted outright, or the history will need to be RD1'd. A new article would be ideal. scope_creep^Talk 07:53, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]