Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orchestra (Linux software)

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Redwolf24 00:36, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Orchestra (Linux software)

I can't find any verification of this anywhere. It sounds like original research. The closest links I can find are Orchestra on SourceForge, which is a system for doing musical composition, and Enea Orchestra, which is an embedded Linux environment. Neither of these seem to be what this program is, so unless someone can figure out what exactly this software is, I think the article should be deleted as non-notable, unverifiable, and probably original research. FreelanceWizard 04:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I've changed my mind. Merge as per Agarax. However, I think most of the distributions in the list of distributions very much fall under non-notable and WP:NOT (not a crystal ball, and not a soapbox -- having every possible distribution there implies strongly a pro-Linux bias). Obviously, though, that's not a discussion for this VfD. ;) By the standard of what's already there, this article should be merged. --FreelanceWizard 08:30, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable. --fvw* 06:22, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I've changed this a little. Googling for "orchestra linux rapid application development" was the key which led me to SymphonyOS. Lupin 13:11, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, you forgot "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball". the wub "?/!" 13:35, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Should Windows Vista and Windows Blackcomb be deleted, then? I'm not clear where this objection is coming from. Lupin 15:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. After reading the SymphonyOS web site, a few things are now clear to me. First is that Orchestra is functionally equivalent to Microsoft's HTML Applications (now essentially dead); it uses an HTTP server to render the interface of what amounts to a CGI script, then displays it in a modified version of Gecko. Second is that it's nowhere near done, as evidenced by the lack of development documentation. Finally, the entire distribution is basically a Knoppix clone otherwise. It's not clear to me that this is a notable advance in computer science or even in Linux application design (any random Linux sysop can use Mozilla to render CGI apps hosted on a local computer), so I stand by my nomination. I think that the future versions of Windows are all but guaranteed to come out (Vista is approaching beta) and are highly notable besides, so it's not exactly predicting the future to talk about them. FreelanceWizard 20:45, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete notability not established. JamesBurns 04:45, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Should be merged with Symphony_OS main article.--Agarax 00:58, 3 August 2005 (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.