Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acknowledgement window size
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 delete. --ST47Talk·Desk 20:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Acknowledgement window size (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)– (View log) Totally unreferenced and orphaned .The article is not clear and not notable.Pharaoh of the Wizards 14:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC) Comment appears to be aprt of a series of imported definitions for the 802.11 standard. --Dhartung | Talk 16:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep if verified, it seems like this is something you'd find in a networking text book Corpx 04:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - this is a single field in a TCP header. It's essentially an entry in a tech dictionary. See the TCP header section of Transmission Control Protocol and you'll find this field buried in the diagram/table of the TCP header. -- Whpq 21:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect anything not already in Transmission Control Protocol and redirect. (Hey, we already did it to SYN (TCP), and everybody knows that syn/ack kind of belong together) --spazure (contribs) (review) 08:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Wknight94 (talk) 14:30, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete dictionary definition. Jakew 18:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Sliding window (not to Transmission Control Protocol, as the concept is found outside TCP as well), or just delete. I'm not sure there's really anything to merge — what there is is barely understandable due to lack of context — and the redirect isn't absolutely necessary seeing as there don't seem to be any links. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 11:13, 8 September 2007 (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.