Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ark Linux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep all. While there are several contributions from IP address editors, and the discussion is somewhat confused by being about several different distributions, there is clearly no consensus to delete any of these. Bduke (talk) 07:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ark Linux

Ark Linux (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

I am nominating several articles for linux distributions. The articles have been tagged with the need for references for over six months and none have turned up. All of the distributions tagged have notability issues due to lack of third party coverage. Wikipedia is not a directory of linux distributions.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 15:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Note I have withdrawn from this list Sidux and OpenSuse due to new sources. I still feel that KnoppMyth is only notable for MythTV which already has an article.
Formatting I have moved some of the multiple bold keeps to their own sections under headings for those users, as many of them were unsigned and I want to eliminate confusion as to how many individual editors are discussing the AfD.

The following articles are also included in this debate:

  • Neutral on VectorLinux -- looks like it has one or two sources, but it is on the very edge of notability. Delete all the others as unsourced. —Snthdiueoa (talk|contribs) 19:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought all of the Vector sources were first party sites, press releases and directory listings. Did I misread them?--Torchwood Who? (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • BTW, we don't generally delete articles for being unsourced. We delete them for being non-notable. Not having sources in an article does not mean the sources do not exist. It's a subtle, but important point. If a piece of software has been the subject of multiple independent published works (such as reviews), then it is notable, even if the article doesn't reference those works. It's our job to fix such arcitles. -- Mark Chovain 22:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Knoppmyth.[1][2] I'm neutral on the rest, but feel it may have been better to raise these as separate AfD's. The issues surrounding each are clearly going to be quite different. -- Mark Chovain 20:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you could place those new references in the myth article, it's currently very lacking in third party sources and my searches didn't bring much up.Both of those are good references.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 21:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
If I'm going to put them in, I'd rather incorporate them properly, so it will need to wait a bit (busy at work at the moment). It's not all that important to an AfD that the references actually be in there (the topics need to be notable, but that notability need not be established in the article). BTW, for reference, I googled "knoppmyth review" to pull those up. -- Mark Chovain 22:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree that unsourced does not mean not notable, but sourced doesn't mean notable. It runs both ways.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep All. These articles are of very high importance on Wikipedia. --Fixman (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep All, it is worth while have articles on these. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Ark Linux, ALT Linux, PLD Linux Distribution, VectorLinux: Ark Linux is a pretty notable distro, and the three others have been in existence for a very long time, and are still maintained. Vector and PLD were released 10 years ago, and ALT was there for the past 7 years. There is absolutely no good reason to remove them. ---AM088 (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Forgot to mention that VectorLinux is 21st on DistroWatch, with 328 hits per day from DistroWatch site only.---AM088 (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

FROM USER 85.182.18.211

  • Keep KnoppMyth a well known linux distribution, maybe article needs cleanup, but no reason for deletion
  • Keep VectorLinux also mentionable and a useful article
  • Keep PLD Linux Distribution Article is not great, but no reason for removal, because subject is important enough - at least in poland —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.182.18.211 (talk) 07:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep KnoppMyth a well known linux distribution, maybe article needs cleanup, but no reason for deletion
  • Keep VectorLinux also mentionable and a useful article
  • Keep PLD Linux Distribution Article is not great, but no reason for removal, because subject is important enough - at least in poland
  • Keep Annvix an active linux distribution dont need to be thrown away
  • Keep sidux looks good - seems as if the article was revised. Must have many users.
  • Keep ALT Linux based mainly in russia, but there is no more cold war - so dont delete!
  • Keep Ark Linux if 50% of wikipedia articles would contain so much information, wikipedias volume would grow by 20% —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.182.18.211 (talk) 07:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

User:85.182.18.211(contribs) has made no other edits outside this AfD.

FROM USER 80.108.89.38

  • Keep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?go=Go&search=sidux While sources are important and needed (and have been added recently), the lack of external sources is not the single objective for non-notability (which would be the sole reason for deleting an article). Most AfD people do a very fine and important job thanks for doing this nasty work, but please stick to a topic where you have serious personal competence in order to be able to decide on non-notability. slam 08:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Ark Linux, KnoppMyth and VectorLinux - those are well known, established Linux distributions with a global user base and notability since several years. slam 08:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

User:80.108.89.38(contribs) has made few edits outside this AfD.

DISCUSSION ABOUT WITHDRAWN ARTICLES

I removed openSuse from the AfD, sorry about that. No one ever removed the references needed template from last year.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 18:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep sidux . References were added on 03-18-2008. Please remove from this list, not from wikipedia. wwwolf3 22:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep sidux . [3] Some external References came up (distrowatch donated to sidux, mentioned on lwn.net, etc.). --84.164.135.195 (talk) 22:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all per all above. I'll try to extend ALT Linux article ASAP. --GreyCat (talk) 07:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep all. Lacking sources is funny as a reason: you don't believe that they exist? But all the information about distributions of free software is perfectly verifiable: download the binaries and check that it works, download the source code and check how it works! Notability, well, I know and consider them notable: Ark Linux, (confused with Arch Linux) ALT Linux, PLD Linux Distribution (and OpenSUSE, but that's not discussed anymore already).
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.