Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/State of Linux Graphics

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 of the debate was delete. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 16:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] State of Linux Graphics

Original research. Prod contested with edit comment Proposal of deletion removed: this article is of great importance for Linux developers. Move it elsewhere if you think it is unencyclopedic but, please, do not delete it. It's not Wikisource material I think, does the Linux community have a FAQ site that could give this a loving home? Weregerbil 09:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - WP:OR essay. Belongs on the authors personal website or a Linux forum. Not wikipedia material Peripitus 10:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all above. A Linux wiki might want it but it doesn't belong on WP. Paddles 12:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• This is a wonderful essay, and it would be a pity to lose it. However, it's nothing but original research, and does not belong in our encyclopaedia. I hope the author moves it somewhere else before we delete it. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete OR they? (Anyone? Rushmore?) -- Kicking222 13:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:OR. I'll admit it's a very good essay though. Ydam 15:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Well, it should be preserved somehow but deleted from the Wikipedia. It's original research. Reyk _YO! 20:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: Rewrite and merge relelvant information into new article entitled Linux graphics. —Viriditas | Talk 20:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and find a way to preserve this elsewhere per nom. jgp 02:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete more for the fact that it is not in the proper format of a Wikipedia article than anything else. Cedars 06:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

From the author, jonsmirl 22 May 2006

The article is a year old and not considered new research any more. I never considered it research to begin with, it is a survey of the state of graphics technology on Linux.

When it was first written it was well publicised and it has been referenced by a dozen papers during the last year. As far as I know it is the most complete description of Linux graphics in existence. I'm trying to find a permanent place to put it so that the historical information it contains won't get lost. Multiple translations are also available.

It doesn't contain standard footnotes, instead everything is linked to the original sources. I have received no objections from any of the sources linked.

I moved it here, but this constant bouncing around between hosts is equivalent to it being deleted. It is linked from close to 1,000 places in google to the freedesktop.org site but they don't want it anymore and deleted it there.

Well, original research is defined as being analysis or synthesis introduced in the article itself rather than from any external sources, even if sourced information is used to justify your analysis and synthesis. Age has nothing to do with it. In other words, Wikipedia should not be the primary home of an essay that introduces its own analysis and synthesis. An article reporting on a similar essay that's published elsewhere would be valid, however. Read WP:NOR if you desire more information. Even if it's published elsewhere, Wikipedia is not a place to publish verbatim copies of such essays (also see WP:NPS, which is titled "Don't include copies of primary sources"). If your essay is as well-publicised as you say it is, you might look into using Wikisource. jgp 18:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. Good research, but this belongs at The Linux Documentation Project. Aguerriero (talk) 19:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete NOR.--Peta 06:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
• The article has been moved to wikisource and nobody has deleted it yet. Hopefully it will be ok there. freedesktop.org has put up a redirect from the existing link to my copy on googlepages. I don't have access to freedesktop.org so I can't change the redirect to wikisource. Linux Documentation Project is not a good home, their project is about building user manuals for software, not the architecture of the Linux kernel. As for relevance there are still 9,000 hits in Google on the title --Jonsmirl 05:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

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.