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.
This topic is, as of know, purely rumor and a violation of
WP:CRYSTAL. Of the three sources mentioned, one is Mary Jo Foley, ZDNet writer whose reputation is not that of full accuracy. The other is Boy Genius Report (BGR) which previously committed forgery in a case related to
Blue Screen of Death. (See
Blue Screen of Death § Incorrect attribution for details.) As there is the case with all rumors, sources give contradictory details:
The Verge says it is going to be a "Windows Store app" while
Softpedia says it is going to be a traditional app. (For none-technical people, suffice to say that "Windows Store apps" and "traditional apps" are opposites.)
BGR and Softpedia show contradictory screenshots.
Information given in the infobox of this article are totally fabricated. There is not even a source to support them. In fact, "Engines" field of the infobox is refuted by existing (unreliable) sources.
Codename Lisa (
talk) 04:55, 9 January 2015 (UTC)reply
I neither agree nor disagree with the deletion, but I think it shouldn't be deleted until 2 weeks have past to see if there is any relevant info t be found. since Microsoft might reveal this browser on the Jan.21 event, if not then I think it should be deleted.
Tony0517 (
talk) 17:03, 10 January 2015 (UTC)reply
It is good to know that. Wikipedia's fundamental policy is waiting those two weeks and then writing the article. But on the other hand, an AfD should run for seven days unless closed per
WP:SNOW. I think in an ideal rule-based Wikipedia, this article is moved to the draft space or userified to remain on standby until 21 January. Minimum destruction, minimum efforts, no major policy violations are the benefits. But I am not a picky person either. Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 18:40, 10 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete Wikipedia is not the place for rumors. Even if more information should be available shortly, it is inappropriate to feature this pure speculation in an encyclopedia.
Piboy51 (
talk) 15:04, 13 January 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, Rcsprinter123(intone) @ 17:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete: I completely agree with
Lisa, Wikipedia isn't a place of rumors. There must a reference providing official announcement by Microsoft. These two references don't provide exact info. But Microsoft will provide detailed info regarding Windows 10 tomorrow ( 21 Jan 2014 ), if it'll make the announcement, then keep otherwise delete. HPDtalk 08:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: per ViperSnake151. --
RaviC (
talk) 18:13, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: per ViperSnake151.
Chmarkine (
talk) 19:54, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: This is not just rumor anymore, it was announced and more information about it will be released in the next few months.
Greatedits1 (
talk) 22:28, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: Confirmed.
VirusKA (
talk) 23:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: It was revealed today
Tony0517 (
talk) 23:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Very Strong Keep: When will people learn to "read & research before nominating for deletions"? Anyhow, this browser has been confirmed on multiple official sources, and since it is very likely that Spartan will gradually replace Internet Explorer after Windows 10, this article should most definitely be kept.
LightandDark2000 (
talk) 08:27, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep - As above. All it needs now is a bit of fleshing out. --
Teh CheezorSpeak 09:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep as explained above. —
Joaquin008(
talk) 12:22, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: This is no longer a
WP:CRYSTAL, so it is no longer a prediction, but rather a fact. Other than that, although the listed sources are poor and the article is not of good quality, more reliable news sources are popping up these few days and it is possible to rewrite the article with a huge room for improvement. This is salvageable. With a quick search with Google, it is easy to find at least five reliable sources which all provide sufficient information to put together an article. This is not worth deleting, by all standards. If it is deleted, it would be a massive problem because then Wikipedia will not have an article about the browser to be bundled with Windows 10 and successor to Internet Explorer. We would then be, not predicting a forthcoming event, but becoming seriously out-dated. Given, also, that this topic has generated such debate for keep/delete, there must be quite some traffic going on this article and many would refer to it.
The Average Wikipedian (
talk) 12:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete: NOT confirmed. It's codenamed "Spartan", it's not the name of the browser. We all know the browser is real but the name of it isn't. For all we know it's IE12. Remove totally until Microsoft itself announces it. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
109.155.14.113 (
talk) 18:02, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
The name doesn't matter. The article can be renamed after its official name is announced.
Chmarkine (
talk) 21:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
The source you provided actually says "Internet Explorer will also be available on Windows 10. Internet Explorer will use the same dual rendering engines as Spartan". So Spartan and IE are different browsers.
Chmarkine (
talk) 21:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
"Spartan" is still IE, it just doesn't support ancient stuff such as ActiveX, P3P, and document modes. Just because Edge is a new engine, it doesn't mean it's a full new browser, which it isn't.
89.114.227.105 (
talk) 13:56, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Spartan does not supporting legacy features. It uses new engine. It has three new features (i.e. reading mode/reading list, Cortana integration and ability to annotate on webpages). I think these are enough to call it a new browser. Also, actually each version of IE has its own article, like
IE 10,
IE 11.
Chmarkine (
talk) 23:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep : as this may have previously been a rumor, it has been confirmed as real now. I disagree with a merge with IE because this is a separate entity not a new IE version. Ppl seeking info about it will search it via it's current codename, not internet explorer.
DeltaDelta5 (
talk) 21:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: While the Spartan browser was once just a rumor, it was, as of January 21, 2015, confirmed to exist by Micorsoft. This is not a violation of
WP:CRYSTAL.
AwesomeSaucer9 (
talk) 00:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep The upcoming Microsoft browser Spartan was showed off at the recent Microsoft and is expected to be in Windows 10.
Polloloco51 (
talk) 03:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: In all fairness, this request for deletion should be withdrawn. It might have made sense to delete on January 9. It sure doesn't now.
Sociallyacceptable (
talk) 04:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep, getting plenty of coverage, and has been confirmed as the successor of Internet Explorer. --
AmaryllisGardenertalk 17:39, 23 January 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.
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.
This topic is, as of know, purely rumor and a violation of
WP:CRYSTAL. Of the three sources mentioned, one is Mary Jo Foley, ZDNet writer whose reputation is not that of full accuracy. The other is Boy Genius Report (BGR) which previously committed forgery in a case related to
Blue Screen of Death. (See
Blue Screen of Death § Incorrect attribution for details.) As there is the case with all rumors, sources give contradictory details:
The Verge says it is going to be a "Windows Store app" while
Softpedia says it is going to be a traditional app. (For none-technical people, suffice to say that "Windows Store apps" and "traditional apps" are opposites.)
BGR and Softpedia show contradictory screenshots.
Information given in the infobox of this article are totally fabricated. There is not even a source to support them. In fact, "Engines" field of the infobox is refuted by existing (unreliable) sources.
Codename Lisa (
talk) 04:55, 9 January 2015 (UTC)reply
I neither agree nor disagree with the deletion, but I think it shouldn't be deleted until 2 weeks have past to see if there is any relevant info t be found. since Microsoft might reveal this browser on the Jan.21 event, if not then I think it should be deleted.
Tony0517 (
talk) 17:03, 10 January 2015 (UTC)reply
It is good to know that. Wikipedia's fundamental policy is waiting those two weeks and then writing the article. But on the other hand, an AfD should run for seven days unless closed per
WP:SNOW. I think in an ideal rule-based Wikipedia, this article is moved to the draft space or userified to remain on standby until 21 January. Minimum destruction, minimum efforts, no major policy violations are the benefits. But I am not a picky person either. Best regards,
Codename Lisa (
talk) 18:40, 10 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete Wikipedia is not the place for rumors. Even if more information should be available shortly, it is inappropriate to feature this pure speculation in an encyclopedia.
Piboy51 (
talk) 15:04, 13 January 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, Rcsprinter123(intone) @ 17:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete: I completely agree with
Lisa, Wikipedia isn't a place of rumors. There must a reference providing official announcement by Microsoft. These two references don't provide exact info. But Microsoft will provide detailed info regarding Windows 10 tomorrow ( 21 Jan 2014 ), if it'll make the announcement, then keep otherwise delete. HPDtalk 08:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: per ViperSnake151. --
RaviC (
talk) 18:13, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: per ViperSnake151.
Chmarkine (
talk) 19:54, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: This is not just rumor anymore, it was announced and more information about it will be released in the next few months.
Greatedits1 (
talk) 22:28, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: Confirmed.
VirusKA (
talk) 23:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: It was revealed today
Tony0517 (
talk) 23:50, 21 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Very Strong Keep: When will people learn to "read & research before nominating for deletions"? Anyhow, this browser has been confirmed on multiple official sources, and since it is very likely that Spartan will gradually replace Internet Explorer after Windows 10, this article should most definitely be kept.
LightandDark2000 (
talk) 08:27, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep - As above. All it needs now is a bit of fleshing out. --
Teh CheezorSpeak 09:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep as explained above. —
Joaquin008(
talk) 12:22, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: This is no longer a
WP:CRYSTAL, so it is no longer a prediction, but rather a fact. Other than that, although the listed sources are poor and the article is not of good quality, more reliable news sources are popping up these few days and it is possible to rewrite the article with a huge room for improvement. This is salvageable. With a quick search with Google, it is easy to find at least five reliable sources which all provide sufficient information to put together an article. This is not worth deleting, by all standards. If it is deleted, it would be a massive problem because then Wikipedia will not have an article about the browser to be bundled with Windows 10 and successor to Internet Explorer. We would then be, not predicting a forthcoming event, but becoming seriously out-dated. Given, also, that this topic has generated such debate for keep/delete, there must be quite some traffic going on this article and many would refer to it.
The Average Wikipedian (
talk) 12:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete: NOT confirmed. It's codenamed "Spartan", it's not the name of the browser. We all know the browser is real but the name of it isn't. For all we know it's IE12. Remove totally until Microsoft itself announces it. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
109.155.14.113 (
talk) 18:02, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
The name doesn't matter. The article can be renamed after its official name is announced.
Chmarkine (
talk) 21:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
The source you provided actually says "Internet Explorer will also be available on Windows 10. Internet Explorer will use the same dual rendering engines as Spartan". So Spartan and IE are different browsers.
Chmarkine (
talk) 21:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
"Spartan" is still IE, it just doesn't support ancient stuff such as ActiveX, P3P, and document modes. Just because Edge is a new engine, it doesn't mean it's a full new browser, which it isn't.
89.114.227.105 (
talk) 13:56, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Spartan does not supporting legacy features. It uses new engine. It has three new features (i.e. reading mode/reading list, Cortana integration and ability to annotate on webpages). I think these are enough to call it a new browser. Also, actually each version of IE has its own article, like
IE 10,
IE 11.
Chmarkine (
talk) 23:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep : as this may have previously been a rumor, it has been confirmed as real now. I disagree with a merge with IE because this is a separate entity not a new IE version. Ppl seeking info about it will search it via it's current codename, not internet explorer.
DeltaDelta5 (
talk) 21:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: While the Spartan browser was once just a rumor, it was, as of January 21, 2015, confirmed to exist by Micorsoft. This is not a violation of
WP:CRYSTAL.
AwesomeSaucer9 (
talk) 00:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep The upcoming Microsoft browser Spartan was showed off at the recent Microsoft and is expected to be in Windows 10.
Polloloco51 (
talk) 03:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep: In all fairness, this request for deletion should be withdrawn. It might have made sense to delete on January 9. It sure doesn't now.
Sociallyacceptable (
talk) 04:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep, getting plenty of coverage, and has been confirmed as the successor of Internet Explorer. --
AmaryllisGardenertalk 17:39, 23 January 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.