Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hymera Linux Distribution

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 delete. The subject does not meet the inclusion guidelines for an article in the encyclopedia. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hymera Linux Distribution[edit]

Just another Debian based Linux distro, no different than most. Only released in March this year so hasn't really had time to gain any notability yet. Web Hamster 10:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Just Another Debian based Linux distro": in my opinion, it is not a good reason to delete article. --Thothos (talk) 11:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

— User:Thothos (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is a classic example of a premature article.--The Legendary Sky Attacker 09:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What makes you think that it is a premature article? Distrowatch, LinuX Freedom, LinuX Freedom for Live, e-linux, linux softpedia, are premature article for you??? -- Thothos (talk) 09:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's premature not because it doesn't exist, which is all those links demonstrate, it's because it isn't yet notable according to Wikipedia standards. --Web Hamster 10:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Linux Distribution Category, there are many other distributions that aren't so notable in my opinion. --Thothos (talk) 10:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't being discussed, this one is. And your opinion isn't relevant, especially as there seems to be a CoI in your case.--Web Hamster 10:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HostGIS, CAOS Linux, DAVIX,...and the list goes on. --Thothos (talk) 11:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's all very well listing these but what isn't clear is why you are listing them. All they do is show that the distro exists (and that its existence has been reasonably well promoted by you and your friends) which isn't being argued. There is nothing to show how this distro differs in any way to the myriad of others. What makes Hymera noteworthy? It would be worth your while having a good read of WP:N and WP:RS. You apparently don't understand that for an entry in WP an article's subject doesn't just have to exist, it has to be noteworthy. I somehow doubt that your distro has gained notability in less than 3 months --Web Hamster 11:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify your doubts, look at the link listed on the article. --Thothos (talk) 11:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I had any doubts I wouldn't have nominated the article in the first place and none of the references in the article meet either WP:RS and/or WP:N which is why I advised you to read those articles. --Web Hamster 12:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Doesn't appear notable at this time. Little online coverage outside of downloads or vague mentions. Greg Tyler ^{(t • c)} 12:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One of many non-notable distros. Gigs (talk) 14:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence of notability. Only 35 unique Ghits. Dawn Bard (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Distrocruft. Miami33139 (talk) 00:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.