Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ROCK Linux
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Black Kite (talk | contribs) at 10:57, 21 November 2009 (Closing debate, result was delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 10:57, 21 November 2009 by Black Kite (talk | contribs) (Closing debate, result was delete)
- 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. Unsourced, claims no notability, even the source found by Sckessey is just a passing mention - and even that source says it's a "lesser known distro". Black Kite 10:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- ROCK Linux (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Clearly an advertisement. The Zwinky (talk) 02:41, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I immediately found evidence of reliable sources when I searched the Google News archives (example). This might be a candidate for being rescued. -- Scjessey (talk) 14:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This CNN link is three sentences. I am yawning. Since when did three sentences on a news site justify an encyclopedia article? SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
- I find this notable because ROCK was one of the earliest "make your own distro" systems, which I was made aware of via print media. This, or a number of committers that contribute these ideas to other projects (Debian, Fedora) would seem to satisfy the notability criteria. rhyre (talk) 09:09, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Comment - A brief mention doesn't make it notable, and the language of the article is more akin to a pitch than an encyclopedia.The Zwinky (talk) 17:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 20:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- unexceptional, go away. Delete this stuff. We do not need articles on every single distro kit, even if it gets references, why is the subject important? SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:10, 13 November 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.