Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DansGuardian (2nd nomination)

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. Neıl ☎ 14:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DansGuardian

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

Delete non-notable software; was nominated a couple of years ago and it may have gone defunct since- again no RSes with significant coverage to meet WP:N Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Iffy: what makes it non-notable? Just because it is no longer in use doesn't seem like a good reason to delete it. Maybe make a statement about its functionality being replaced by more recent software? --Revanche (talk) 01:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak Delete - Looks like it has reasonably wide spread usage, but nothing seems to really make it notable. No coverage in the media, and most of the ghits are how-to guides and requests for assistance. Burzmali (talk) 15:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
• KEEP- This is a major OSS project used by hundreds of institutions. How is it not notable? Jgw (talk) 03:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. "May have gone defunct?" What the heck? Web page says the package was last updated in December (even the article itself claims the package was updated in August!!!). AFAIK it's still maintained and still in wide use, included in Linux distributions. Has been covered in media (e.g. Linux Journal, probably others; there's other article mentions in news page). --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:23, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak Delete Whether the software is defunct or not doesn't matter, however the article doesn't seem to pass WP:N. After some searching it clearly has a strong Internet presence, but couldn't find any significant coverage in reliable sources. -- pb30<talk> 23:32, 22 January 2008 (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.