Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smart File System: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:42, 3 October 2015

Revision as of 08:36, 3 October 2015

Line 21:

*'''Keep''' AfD talks a bunch about notability, but the underlying policy behind all this is [[WP:V|verifiability]]; if there are enough third-party sources to be able to verify an article, that should be considered notability enough (and this is pretty much exactly what [[WP:GNG]] says!), and if there aren't, you'll never be able to write a verifiable article and thus it should be deleted. Seeing the conversation above made me fear that the article couldn't be verified (a one-sentence mention isn't really enough), but although some of the existing citations are dubious, there seems to be enough valid ones around that it's possible to write a verifiable article (perhaps a shorter one than currently, though). --[[User:ais523|ais523]] 06:42, 3 October 2015 ([[User:ais523|U]][[User talk:ais523|T]][[Special:Contributions/Ais523|C]])

* '''Comment'''. I'm seeing a lot of keep votes and very few sources. If there isn't significant coverage in reliable sources, then the article should probably be redirected or merged somewhere. You don't inherit notability from your parent operating system. Otherwise, we'd have an entire encyclopedia full of Linux kernel miscellany. Or, at least, it would be even worse than what we do have. The problem is that the Amiga has been dead for 20 years. I'm not even sure where to start looking for sources, but there may be something useful on Google Books. My searches didn't really turn up much there. This could probably be redirected to [[list of file systems]] if no in-depth sources are found. [[User:NinjaRobotPirate|NinjaRobotPirate]] ([[User talk:NinjaRobotPirate|talk]]) 08:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)