Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPhone OS4

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 no consensus. feel free to use editorial discretion on a redirect Spartaz ^Humbug! 05:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IPhone OS4

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

Wikipedia does not predict the future. Only source for this article was a rumor site. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Yes, clearly an obvious crystal violation. Truthsort (talk) 21:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - practically no information on a not-yet-existing product. LadyofShalott 23:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' It will not be crystal two days from now, by the time the afd period has concluded. Ref. E-Week which is no rumor site. There's a weird tendency around here , to doubt that the earth will continue to revolve around its axis. DGG ( talk ) 05:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Now, now. Apple isn't quite that predictable is it? Or maybe it is… either way, if this has multiple confirmed reports, and the announcement is 99% likely to occur tomorrow, it's not quite as "crystal-ly" as I initially supposed. I drop my opposition. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 16:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Reuters among others. WP:CRYSTAL does not mean that wikipedia always looks backwards. These are the kind of one-line stubs that can end up as FAs. This appears sufficiently notable not to warrant a merge to iPhone OS but I'll defer judgment on that to the techo experts that will no doubt comment here. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep GSMArena also states that OS4 will be released tomorrow, by then there will be plenty of information to include in the article tomorrow. Mikyt90 (talk) 13:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While Crystal could be invoked here, let's remember that it's generally for things far in the future. With the OS being released tomorrow, I think it's something that we can go ahead and keep and update rather than just delete. Dusti^{Insert Sly Comments} 15:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Technically, that doesn't necessarily mean it will happen (this is still rumor sites), but I'll grant, Apple operates this way with such regularity that it's not really a rumor, more of a controlled leak. I'm willing to withdraw my nomination for deletion, so long as people add a few (mostly) independent rumor site references to confirm the incredibly high likelihood that it would exist. Though this may still be more suited as an expansion of the general iPhone OS article, rather than its own article, that's not a discussion that needs to happen here. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 16:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to place this AFD nomination on hold for 24 hours to see if Apple makes a move? At that point, I'm sure there will be an abundance of information to add to the article. Dusti^{Insert Sly Comments} 16:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me. Honestly, we could just as soon close it. If it doesn't happen, we renominate it immediately (hell, in a sense, it might be eligible for CSD under the hoax criteria). —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 16:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge People: it's not being released, it's being previewed. Let's merge this to iPhone OS until solid info comes out. fetchcomms☛ 21:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to be renamed to IPhone OS 4 which has already been redirected. I think we do the same here until concrete info is out. If April 8 doesn't bring much more than more speculation, there's no need for it's own article yet. fetchcomms☛ 01:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to iPhone OS version history#4.0. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ message • changes) 20:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: We have an article for that? Definitely should be a redirect then; I see no compelling reason why it should be a separate article. As the original AfD nominator, am I able to change my vote to Redirect? —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 21:03, 8 April 2010 (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.