Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gatekeeper (software)

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 KEEP. 6-1 vote. Argument that there are no WP:RELIABLESOURCES has been addressed. Non-admin closure. -- Sailing to Byzantium _(msg), 01:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gatekeeper (software)

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

The article is pure speculation and doesn't assert notability with reliable sources. Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions 15:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.apple.com/macosx/mountain-lion/security.html Zach Vega (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And as for notability, ask Teh Google, which pops up a ton of articles, such as this MacWorld article. Guy Harris (talk) 19:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that it's been moved to Gatekeeper (software), which is appropriate (it's not a stand-alone application). Dunno if the AfD should be renamed or not (hopefully it'll be closed soon so it won't be relevant). Guy Harris (talk) 02:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And it's now been moved to Gatekeeper (OS X). The links go to this debate, no need to move it around. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 16:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per references already in the article. Furthermore, given that it is (1) just released software (2) by Apple, I believe deleting it would be impractical: anyway it will be re-created, and the steady stream of Apple-related news will surely get this program as much coverage in reliable sources as would be needed to make this article's existence bullet-proof. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the same reasons stated above by User:Czarkoff. Haseo9999 (talk) 01:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per my and Zach Vega's comments. Guy Harris (talk) 01:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as for the same reasons Gary and I listed. Zach Vega (talk) 01:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable feature of OS, comparable to Microsoft Security Essentials which is also maintained as an article in the software section. NotinREALITY 04:11, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, hardly speculation has it is documented by Apple itself. [1] and severeal third-party media publications [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] --SF007 (talk) 07:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus seems to be already clear, this item can be closed as keep per WP:SNOW. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Gatekeeper (disambiguation) identifies at least one other computing or software "Gatekeeper". If kept, the content of this page should probably be moved (again) to a less ambiguous name. Perhaps Gatekeeper (Mac OS X)? Rossami (talk) 02:53, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or "Gatekeeper (OS X)", given that it first appears in the first version of the Darwin-based operating-system-with-a-desktop-environment that was never called "Mac OS X" by its vendor, just "OS X". In any case, that comment probably belongs in the article's talk page, not here. Guy Harris (talk) 07:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been moved to Gatekeeper (OS X) by User:Zach Vega. I took the liberty of redirecting the MAC OS X version to that target; it doesn't seem unreasonable to imagine some confusion there. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 16:04, 23 February 2012 (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.