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 Casio FX-602P series. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:26, 10 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Casio FA-2 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Unsourced, no indication of notability. BoxOfChickens ( talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 00:49, 27 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Keep This is a perfectly good article. There is no need to let this deletionist rid wikipedia of all information on Casio. This evil person is launching a jihad of censorship against Casio and needs to be stopped. Malcolm's office ( talk) 07:09, 27 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Lol. BoxOfChickens ( talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 07:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC) reply

User has made no edits elsewhere. Wonder who the sockmaster is. GAB ^Hello! 00:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Quick checkuser maybe? BoxOfChickens ( talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 01:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Go ahead, but I'm unsure who the master would be... GAB ^Hello! 20:42, 1 February 2016 (UTC) reply

A quick checkuser request is now open. BoxOfChickens ( talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 19:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:01, 27 January 2016 (UTC) reply

• Redirect I added some of the article's tiny contents to Casio_FX-602P_series#Interface. Information about FA-2 already existed there. -- Mr. Magoo and McBarker ( talk) 05:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep. This AFD and other Casio product AFDs is not a good way to discuss better editing, I mean real editing like a book publisher does, of Wikipedia's coverage of Category:Programmable calculators or of Casio products (see Casio#Calculators). How about write an essay evaluating the coverage of TI and Casio and HP and Sharp and IBM calculators, and propose how it should all be consolidated into list-articles (perhaps, or whatever), and have an RFC about it. (And Mr. Magoo and McBarker's edits mentioned are much less than creating a decent list-article.) Singling out the Casio ones, or just selected Casio ones, doesn't produce a useful consensus that would stick. Maybe there is less detail about Casio ones than TI ones, and the TI ones should be reduced. Where should we draw a line? And, note that it would be better to redirect this and other Casio calculator articles to a list-article of them, than to outright delete the material, to preserve material that can be merged and refined. Create the list-article first, following example of Comparison of Texas Instruments graphing calculators, perhaps. -- do ncr am 00:36, 4 February 2016 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to a list or main article. BoxOfChickens ( talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 00:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC) reply
• Redirect if needed. SwisterTwister talk 22:47, 8 February 2016 (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.