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. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:27, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dual pipelining (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article is a confused and completely erroneous WP:CONTENTFORK of superscalar processor. "Dual pipelining" is not a synonym for "superscalar processor", so this article shouldn't be redirected. 99Electrons (talk) 02:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 02:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

delete. It seems there is no established usage of the expression to designate any particular technology in general or in the context of processor architectures in particular. Scientific articles mentioning "dual pipelining" do not use the expression to refer to any established topic but 1) use it to describe many different concepts ranging from image processing to biotechnology and 2) generally clarify its use in the context of the article. Bukharin (talk) 03:49, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The sources cited in the article use dual pipelining to refer to entirely different concepts, which are not all related with what the article claims the term to mean. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 15:39, 5 March 2019 (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.