Deletion of Xbox One system software

Comment: A friendly reminder |that AfD "consensus is not based on a tally of votes, but on reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments." |What Wikipedia is not is a core WP policy and the only defense above is "|If it ain't broke, don't fix it" (|not policy-backed). I get that editors find the changelogs useful, but I don't think those editors understand the scope of the encyclopedia forged through many years of consensus. –&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:CLOSEAFD||WP:WWIN||WP:BROKE||WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: So why are we allowed to have Android version history and iOS version history? VGSCOPE does not say game hardware, it says the version history ''of a game'' (although I just amended that guideline right now, because the whole passage applies to game and game-related topics). But that seems to be in the spirit of . However, the  really says "Use reliable third-party (not self-published or official) sources in articles dealing with software updates to describe the versions listed or discussed in the article. Common sense must be applied with regard to the level of detail to be included." So it's not a full-on ban on changelogs
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCHANGELOG)

Comment: sure changelogs are against wiki policy but the content of the articles can be rewritten to fit the style of  and no longer appear to be changelogs and leave out all over detailed or non notable content, for example major features being delivered via a software update is most certainly notable, but it doesn't need a changelog, though personally I would like to see the changelogs stay and though Wikipedia is notorious for double standards (as the iOS changelog has gone unchallenged for quite some time, but gaming console changelogs are to be deleted), but policy is policy, but then again I've seen enough "seasoned" editors throw out wikipolicies whenever they please and with these articles I'm sure that a lot of experienced editors have contributed to these changelogs, too bad that there isn't an option to migrate them to more specialized Wikia sites. --Special:Contributions/58.187.228.171|58.187.228.171
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:PROSE)

Comment: all the entries referenced to reliable sources per , which states: ''"'''Use''' reliable third-party in articles dealing with software updates to describe the versions listed or discussed in the article."''  is not a prohibition to have changelogs, it's a warning againts excessively detailed ones. Everyone saying that the policy forbids changelogs should re-read what its wording actually says. It is commonly understood that a listing of the main changes from one version to the next, with its significance being analyzed by reliable sources, is encyclopedic and not against the policy. {{pb
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CHANGELOG||WP:CHANGELOG)

Comment: I think  is misguided to begin with. For software that has met the bar for noteworthiness I believe version data should be kept in a sub-page as has been done with the game consoles previously. Wikipedia is likely to be one of very few long term reliable host of this data in to the future, if it is not held on Wikipedia it is likely to become lost in time. The main article about the game console is not being impacting by storing version info on a separate page. As it does not impact the readability of the main article are we risking the longevity of this popular data over some disk space? Deleting popular data in an era where disk space is cheap does not appear to serve any people currently or into the future.  —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/58.160.173.214|58.160.173.214
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCHANGELOG)

Comment: to their respective console's sections on software (which is to say restore the redirect). Both |What Wikipedia is not (#4, policy) and the |WPVG guidelines (#9, guideline) both say explicitly that we do not host changelogs as an encyclopedia. If the respective console articles began to bulge in their software sections and saw a need to spill out Wikipedia:Summary style|summary style into their own articles, then no problem, but that's not what's happening here. These are just really big tables of every single, minute change to software, which meets the policy and guidelines of what we do not host to the letter. Anything that needs to be said about the system software can be said in the parent articles unless reliable sources show that the software has something significant that makes it more than just a part of the product. –&nbsp
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTCHANGELOG||WP:VGSCOPE)

Comment: all of them - per .  It's not encyclopedic to list every system update that occurs, and the operating system info is better shown as a (shorter) section in its respective parent article. (I would have challenged these articles sooner, but the pure volume of these sorts of articles made me think they were acceptable. If you actually look into policy though, it is not
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)