Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blosxom

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The result was Keep — nomination withdrawn. --Aarktica 14:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blosxom

Blosxom (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails WP:NOTABILITY and WP:SOFTWARE, I used WP:PROD, but someone removed it. There are 0 third party sources. Jackaranga 22:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. No sources, not notable. Realkyhick 23:35, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's a small but notable-enough application. First, there are 3 million hits for "blosxom" on Google, and there's nothing except this called "blosxom". Second, those two Further reading books, from a significant publisher, discuss it at a level of detail (unfortunately, I don't have access to them to see how much). Third, Blojsom, a Blosxom derivative, is bundled with Mac OS X Server, and Blosxom is an official package for Ubuntu and other distributions. It seems to have 131 installs on the Debian Popularity Contest - I'm not sure whether that's a decent number, but there you go. Fourth, there are reviews and guides to Blosxom in reliable publications, such as this one in Guardian Unlimited, this one in Linux Journal, and another in MacUser, and we can add those sources to the article. Fifth, it's a core product of a developer (Rael Dornfest) who is at least notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. My only bias is that I still use it to run my blog. :) Dreamyshade 04:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Ok I change my mind, I vote keep too. Jackaranga 09:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: It is notable; the article could make that clearer, but this is a fixer, not a trasher. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 09:26, 28 July 2007 (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.