Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exherbo (2nd nomination)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Exherbo

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Exherbo
• Articles for deletion/Exherbo (2nd nomination)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Exherbo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unclear notability, as a software project it does not seem to have gained significant attention. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 01:19, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why? There are about 40 to 70 developers (a lot because they encourage "user as developers"). It is not an "extra theme distro". The distro is uniquely encouraging distributed development. Their model of development is by nature only suitable for minorities, thus no "significant attention" which is probably not important. Like a lot of experimental programming languages in history, no many users, but still influential. Distros today are all centralized, this one is like the one cool kid in the class. slbtty (talk) 01:33, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Software and Denmark. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:21, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - @Shenlebantongying: brings up reasons why this distribution is potentially interesting but none that establish that it is notable. There appears to have been a few mentions here and there, but nothing that would lead me to suspect it was deleted in error after the last AfD. PianoDan (talk) 16:41, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:18, 7 May 2022 (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.