Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Windows 11, version 22H2

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 redirect‎ to Windows 11 version history. Seems like the best compromise that will satisfy the most participants in this debate. If any specific (sourced) content in this article should be merged into the parent, that can be done by ordinary editing. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 11, version 22H2

[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)

Merge to Windows 11 version history No reason for a single major Windows update for a single operating system to have its own page.

See Windows 10 version history we can always just use the TOC.

Additionally during the move Awesome Aasim (talk · contribs) appears to have copied an older version of the tables that do not accurately reflect the current state of Windows 11 updates. - nathanielcwm (talk) 16:35, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. - nathanielcwm (talk) 16:35, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My bad it was KCCian24 (talk · contribs) who started the page. Also pinging Edgardo Aurellano (talk · contribs) as they've appeared to have made non minor contributions to the page.- nathanielcwm (talk) 16:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:NOTCHANGELOG. I did not copy and paste, just removed the tables. We cannot just indiscriminately list changelogs unless if each version in of itself is notable. It is very difficult, but not impossible, to establish secondary sources that report on these updates. I have found How to force the Windows 11 2022 Update and get it early on your PC | Windows Central and Windows 11 version 22H2: Everything you need to know about the latest version of Windows | Windows Central and Windows 11 22H2 | PCMag as establishing notability for this article. On the other hand, if we are to log every single change on one page it would result in the page exploding in size (see Wikipedia:Article size and what happened with Windows 10 version history). Notable features can be spun off into their own version articles, if there is nothing notable then we can just give a short summary on the main version page. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 01:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Windows 11 Version 22H2 had 2 component updates and a future component update is on the way with reliable sources. Microsoft Accidentally Confirms Big Windows 11 22H2 Moment 3 Update Windows 11 Moment 3 Appears on the Horizon Microsoft May Release Windows 11 Moment 3 to Beta Channel Insiders Soon According to Wikipedia:Notability it is notable enough to have its own page. ŇƗΜŘØỮ Đ€ŁΔỮŘ€ŇŦƗŞ (TALK) 02:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Windows 11 version history#Version 22H2 (2022 Update) for now according to Hayman30's suggestion on a similar AfD prior to this one. The reason that individual articles were created was to reduce the size of the version history article; only currently supported versions (21H2 and 22H2) are kept on the full version history, while unsupported builds are moved to their own articles. A similar point Aasim mentioned above. As a matter of fact, although such action may be a bit controversial in some areas in WP's rules, it is still a brilliant idea (for the time being). Because of these, I would suggest the same rules would apply for the page windows 11 version history. My idea is, for W11, we may split any version to its own page once it reaches EOL for Home and Pro editions @ least.197.238.11.228 (talk) 13:40, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, we need to remember Wikipedia:NOTINDISCRIMINATE and make sure that any and all of the information that is added is (a) notable and (b) encyclopedic. If it is neither of these things it should not be included. An RfC looking into how to handle version histories may be warranted to make sure we do not get monstrous explosions of non-encyclopedic listings. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 15:57, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But now we have another problem: version history pages now have a comma in their title:

Pinged Meno25 because he was the one who created some of those redirects and, whether or not, if we should keep the comma. BTW, what is the idea of having the comma in those titles like this page?197.238.11.228 (talk) 17:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The commas in the title are probably because that is what is referred to on Microsoft documentation. See Windows 11, version 22H2 known issues and notifications | Microsoft Learn Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:04, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the suggestion by 197.238.11.228 (talk · contribs) to keep them in Windows 11 version history until they're EOL then split once they are as part the previous consensus from previous AfDs for Windows 10 version history articles. - nathanielcwm (talk) 11:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Informing Ronniecoln Loudtiago, Jm.Huang and Xiejunmingsa to join this [heating] debate because they are the ones responsible for adding updates to those pages.197.238.11.228 (talk) 17:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:20, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JalenFolf: please, do not revert my WP:GOODFAITH edits made on windows 10 version history and Windows 10, version 21H1 claiming it "undiscussed". According to talk:windows 10 version history's archives, there have been made several attempts to split the page. Furthermore, those conversations periodically resulted in AfD debates, with the current debate being the forth nomination. Presently, firefox version history is nominated for deletion as well. Even several editors, including me anonymously, ® sick of having such release history pages lengthy in size.197.240.204.1 (talk) 20:20, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As much as I want to trust your good-faith efforts, those discussions did not reach a consensus. I have no comment in regards to this discussion, but there needs to be a proper split discussion before contentious edits like yours can be made. Jalen Folf (talk) 21:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JalenFolf: correction, users did reach consensus but it seems that U don't trust my points. Go through them over again, press CTRL F and search for "split". U'll realise how much the word was mentioned.

Talk:Windows 10 version history/Archive 1

Talk:Windows 10 version history/Archive 2

Finally, I still do not understand any clue to have my contributions undone.197.240.204.1 (talk) 21:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Mostly consists of long tables that violate WP:NOTCHANGELOG. I counted only six non-primary sources, and this version doesn't appear to be standalone GNG notable (even with the additional sources brought up in this discussion). SWinxy (talk) 03:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect alternatively instead per 197.238.11.228's points above.197.238.65.104 (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree if the information is unencyclopedic it should not at all be included in either the main Version History page or a split of that page, per WP:NOTCHANGELOG. IMHO a single page documenting a single notable update with coverage from Windows Central, PC World, etc. does a better job at not violating that policy than having all the content on one page. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Windows 11 version history. Stifle (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The release itself (not the change log) can be merged to Windows 11 or Windows 11 version history. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:03, 12 May 2023 (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.