Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adriane Knoppix
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 merge with Knoppix. The final version has yet to be released and the keepers have failed to demonstrate enough independent notability, at this point in time, for a separate article. OTOH there is no consensus to delete and there is plainly mergeable encyclopaedic material. TerriersFan 21:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Adriane Knoppix[edit]
Notability to come. Chealer 02:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 08:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep — I imagine this just needs a bit more research to provide the WP:RS which will verify notability. JodyB talk 15:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There's an assertion of notability, but with a quick search amongst the handful of ghits, I didn't see anything I would really consider a reliable source. Feel free to provide one or two if you find them, and I'll switch to keep. It's a recurrent problem with homemade freeware, there's no advertising, no sales, no delivery to stores, so no momentum to make it notable. And few truly reliable sources are interested in covering topics that don't already seem notable in some manner. Just my opinion. Someguy1221 02:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KrakatoaKatie 23:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Wikipedia is not a Crystal ball. If this comes out and has some notability then the article can be recreated. ~ Wikihermit 23:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait I think this is notable, but can't demonstrate it with solid sources after cursory research. However, lack of sources for a topic which appears notable is not sufficient grounds for deletion. I think that the writers should be contacted and encouraged to provide sources. --Kevin Murray 13:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge with Knoppix maybe? Cwolfsheep 21:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Keep, or at least let me merge with Knoppix. I created this article when the project was announced. Klaus Knopper is a major Linux developer; this is about a 'favourite' software development by him (because of his wife), and when it is released it will be completely noteworthy. So, why would it not be noteworthy during its development when it is expected to be released in just months? (And, I've put in some more detail.) - Peter Ellis - Talk 03:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Adriane Knoppix, The Proyect ADRIANE, exist, or is under current development.... see here please: [1]... Maybe, and only MAYBE must be merge with Knoppix... --V A R G U X 04:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC) Write me a note[reply]
- Delete Worthy product but notability unproven. --Gavin Collins 13:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Citing from WP:N: The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice". This concept is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity". Short question: How many operating systems for the blind do you know? Further, extending the argument: first versions have been presented ([2]) -- so we have a case similar to Haiku --. Third and last: The author of the OS is Klaus Knopper, a well-known author of linux operating systems, so not just anybody. I conclude that this article can be included perfectly well. --Ben T/C 17:34, 18 June 2007 (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.