Deletion of Windows Odyssey (2nd nomination)

Comment: Even after re-writing and sourcing, it still says fundamentally the same thing as what is at the development article.  This article is never going to grow past what is already written elsewhere.  We do not need duplicated content.  Odyssey, as shown by sources, was a minor development fork ten years ago.  This subject matter has no growth potential.  Anything to be written about it has been.  There is a |weight problem here, because the attention this article receives on Wikipedia is far more than what the rest of the world has shown it.  A standalone article lends importance to a minor subject of duplicated content
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: I've rewritten the article from what source |actually says. Please watch out for SPAs and IPs pushing more  speculation in it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:OR)

Comment: There is no assertion of notability, and there was no released product! This article can never be "improved" unless we imagine that  includes every minor development cycle of Microsoft's products. The infobox saying "Part of the Microsoft Windows family" makes Wikipedia look silly because it is just a total misunderstanding of the normal development process of large projects
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: or '''redirect'''. The article has been cleaned-up of  (see discussion further below). Although it's likely to remain a perma-stub in the near future (unless someone breaks some MS NDA big time), this AfD should come to a  close
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SNOW)