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

Revision as of 15:38, 12 October 2015

Revision as of 15:52, 12 October 2015

Line 41:

*'''Comment''' - I've added another two sources, one to an article on the ''Total Amiga'' magazine elaborating on how to make the best use of hard drives, and including some information about SFS previously not on our article (deleted files directory), and another to a mention on [[Ars Technica]] claiming that (as of 2008, when the article was written) the filesystem was still in active use among "Amiga fans". --[[User:LjL|LjL]] ([[User talk:LjL|talk]]) 12:15, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

**The Ars Technica magazine is just a brief one-line mention. The ''Total Amiga'' entry has some substance, but it's still not really enough to establish notability. It's the only (somewhat) good source on the article, and GNG says that multiple in-depth sources are expected. Think about it: if this subject was really notable, why must we press really hard through obscure fans-only magazines to find even a single one-paragraph mention? --[[User:Biblioworm|<span style="color:#6F4E37;">'''''Biblio'''''</span>]][[User_talk:Biblioworm|<span style="color:#6F4E37">'''''worm'''''</span>]] 15:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

:** Uhm, because it's a computer file system, making it not exactly everyone's favorite conversation topic, but if this intrinsic paucity of secondary sources is not accounted for, then many legitimate technical topics will never have the amount of coverage some editors want for everything. I must also mention I find it a slight symptom of bias when I comment about adding sources and people consistently counter-comment "but it's still not enough". [[User:LjL|LjL]] ([[User talk:LjL|talk]]) 15:52, 12 October 2015 (UTC)