- 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. Sr13 03:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Basilisk Linux (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Dead non-notable Linux distribution. I never red about Basilisk Linux except on Wikipedia, but checked Google hits anyway. Warning: Basilisk Linux returns many hits, but most are not about Basilisk Linux. "Basilisk Linux" gets under 500 preliminary hits. Chealer 00:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As not meeting WP:N and WP:V, also WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE issues. It's been said in AfD before that WP is not linux.org and it's not worth every minor linux distro being documented here, serves no benefit or purpose. Thewinchester (talk) 03:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Turn into stone. Last update on the project website was in 2004. There's no evidence this was ever a notable distribution, and it's very unlikely that it ever will be at this rate. Zetawoof(ζ) 09:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Grudgingly, Delete. There are hundreds of Linux distributions, most of which are specialised or dead. I don't think this one merits an article of its own, certainly not when places like DistroWatch can do a much better job than we can because they specialise in it. Anakin 12:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 10:22, 13 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.