Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hecatonchires (GPU Family)

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 delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 21:37, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hecatonchires (GPU Family)

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

No multiple source for this article, most of the cited source is from Fudzilla with several sites that mirror that source only. And the other two sources are unrelated from the codename "Hecatonchires". AMD64 (talk) 09:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. --AMD64 (talk) 09:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Many sources are skeptical that there is a family of GPUs codenamed "Hecatonchires", calling it rumour and speculation. I believe WP:CRYSTAL is a relevant policy here. While I would reconsider if these GPUs were a notable rumor, this is not the case. Most mentions of these GPUs are routine fanboi forum threads, not anything remotely RS. Fudzilla is also a dubious source as well — the tech world equivalent of a trashy gossip or tabloid publication, no? Lastly, I suggest that the Find sources template not be used — this is the second time where I have participated in an AfD where the template was given an implausable Invented-for-Wikipedia-for-Disambiguation-Purposes^TM name that no one uses to search for. Rilak (talk) 01:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete - There is or was an ATI based GPU code name Hecatonchires but AMD may have changed plans due to the 32nm process being cancelled. They may have been forced to scrap its Hecatonchires plans either permanently or just postponed in the meantime. I am sure more information will surface once Northern Islands GPU gets talked about more. I would hate to see this page deleted. I recommend we keep it in the meantime for 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nt300 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unreferenced therefore unverifiable. As to the above argument as to what AMD may do in the future, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.Mtiffany71 (talk) 20:20, 4 October 2010 (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.