Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Network Installation Manager

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. KaisaL (talk) 02:40, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Network Installation Manager

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another unsourced AIX component. Lack of sources means it is not a suitable merger candidate. MSJapan (talk) 05:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 09:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of TCP and UDP port numbers#Registered ports. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:21, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But it has nothing to do with IP port numbers? It is a management system... DeVerm (talk) 21:44, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You'll get no argument from me. My reasoning was simply that the proposed target is the only other place on Wikipedia that mentions it. Frankly, I wouldn't be opposed to an outright deletion. NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment sources come up when searching for the abbreviation "NIM" or better "AIX NIM" DeVerm (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - "Lack of sources" was in regard to the merge, as that is predicated on current state of material. The general issue I saw is that I don't see (in general)how we have an article on a tool/component of an OS without falling into WP:NOTGUIDE; so much of what's out the comes from a usage standpoint, and it's not like a physical tool that you can track developments in easily. MSJapan (talk) 22:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A simple WP:BEFORE-style search shows agood number of RS for this topic. I added 9 references to the article, 3 of which are primary and 6 secondary. There are enough in-depth RS to confer notability per WP:GNG and to support a modest article on the topic, and a plethora of authoritative primary sources to draw from as well for uncontroversial knowledge. A notable topic and an article with surmountable problems suggests keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 05:26, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It was not a clear case for me, hence my earlier comments. Now that Mark has aded the references I have to conclude that the article meets our notability guidelines, plus I think this AIX component is worthy of it's own article not just because of it's role in AIX but also outside that like in Linux. I hope that editors improve it but until then it can stay as a stub. DeVerm (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2016 (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.