Talk:Internet Explorer 1
|This redirect is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 21 October 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.|
|A summary of this article appears in Internet Explorer.|
Some time ago there was an edit war (for example here: ) because of the phrase: "However, by including it for free on their OS they did not have to pay royalties to Spyglass Inc., which resulted in a lawsuit and multi-million USD settlement."
At the end, this phrase was removed. But I looked at the Wikipedia page "Microsoft litigation" (in the "Private" section, ) and I noticed that it speaks about this fact with a reference. Can I re-insert this phrase in this article with this reference: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/january/new0122d.htm?
I'm an Italian wikipedian, so sorry for my bad English! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luca Ghio (talk • contribs) 16:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- I bring back the sentence. THX for the reference. Your English is well. The reference will be added in the IE and the Spyglass article also. mabdul 18:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Merge/redirect (or delete) page
This page should be merged into Internet Explorer versions (done/merged, except Infobox). Note, not same as recent proposal. For still important/current features into: Internet Explorer (done, for historical overview). Then, if really ok, change this page into a redirect into Internet Explorer.
Note: Internet Explorer versions is not oversized and a lot of, non-existent (in this page at least), details could be added. Maybe the Infobox, not sure they are required as they should be redundant info(?) Internet Explorer should need no expansion but just in case it's now 24 KB smaller than yesterday (and could lose some KB with one table).
I'm not sure Internet Explorer got WP:NOTABLE under Wikipedia rules until after "version 1.0". Even if so, it already has a page: Internet Explorer and all the gory details under Internet Explorer versions for that version. The former page reflects mostly the most recent version/features as it should but has a historical summary of other versions in WP:SUMMARY style. No info is lost in the latter one or needs.
I might be splitting hairs here, but the name was not actually "Internet Explorer 1" as the title says and therefore cannot be notable under that article name. There was no "1" in the end of the name.
The symmetry of names (and full sequence) of Internet Explorer 1 2 3.. version articles isn't terribly important and is wrong anyway. Some versions were named "Windows Internet Explorer". comp.arch (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)