Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RAM image

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. If desired, a merge discussion can continue on the article's talk page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:07, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RAM image

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

Unsourced orphan with no indication importance or notability and seems to fail GNG. 3gg5amp1e (talk) 19:58, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep https://www.google.com/search?q="ram+image"+embedded —Ruud 11:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This could probably be merged somewhere, such as booting, bootstrapping, or embedded system. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Not really revolutionary stuff in the article for those of us from the days of DOS and yore, but also the sort of thing that's so much in common knowledge that asking for it to be heavily cited it a bit ridiculous. It's also a concept that anyone going back to the days of how we ran big software with small RAM will probably need to know. (shrug) It's true, and it's useful, so.... Hithladaeus (talk) 13:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with something else. Don't think it's notable enough for its own article, but could be a valid section of another article. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:22, 27 May 2015 (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.