Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aperture card

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 keep. W.marsh 21:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aperture card

Aperture card (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

The article is redundant with text in Punched card. tooold 21:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - If above is true, it should be merged with Punched card and Aperture card should redirect there. -- Austin Murphy 15:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Is true. And since redundant, there is nothing to merge. When reviewing them you might have noticed that the Punched card text actually has more detail than the article to be deleted. tooold 17:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:MERGE and WP:DELETE for more details on why redundant articles should be merged and not deleted. I oppose deleting the article. If it were deleted, then when someone went to "wikipedia.org/wiki/Aperture_card" they would get nothing. If the merge procedure was followed, they would get redirected to "Punched_card". -- Austin Murphy 18:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tikiwont 09:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• Merge and Redirect As with Hollerith card, most readers would probably not know the name of this type of punched computer card (Hollerith card). I confess that I had never heard of an "aperture card", and was surprised that keypunched cards are still in use anywhere. Mandsford 12:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Merge with Punched card. The concepts are way too similar. --Blanchardb 18:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep The conceptsare quite distinct. These are cards that in addition to theone line of characters encoded on a punched card, contain the full data object itself. Sure, theyre essentially obsolete, but this was a very important form of distribution for technical documentation in its era, and widely used in business also. That most readers would not know the name is the stranger reasons for deletion I've encountered -- WP exists in particular to provide information about unfamiliar things. Those who do encounter it, will need the informatgion, and there can be references from the related articles. DGG (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and do not merge. This is not the same thing as a punched card. -- Whpq 18:23, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

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.