Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linux Documentation Project

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. John254 03:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Linux Documentation Project (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Fails WP:WEB. Regardless of how well-known the project is in its niche, it hasn't been covered significantly by multiple independent sources. The article's claims to fame are as follows: that it was the first Linux-related website on the Internet (which is unsourced, and of dubious notability), and that some of its content has seen dead-tree publication (which is of no concern because notability isn't inherited). Contested prod (which for some reason was open for seventeen days). Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Did you do a Google News search on this? I came up with quite a number of 3rd party – credible – reliable and verifiable sources, as shown here [1]. Also Google Scholar contains quite a bit of information as shown here [2]. I’ll inline cite over the next couple of days. Thanks ShoesssS ^Talk 15:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Undead Warrior (talk) 16:03, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Undead Warrior (talk) 16:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's quite notable; the article should be improved, rather than deleted. Jclemens (talk) 17:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the sources found by ShoesssS are more than enough to demonstrate notability. Scog (talk) 22:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - it is notable because it is described in most printed books about linux. --Itub (talk) 06:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Taking my 1998 copy of Red Hat Linux Unleashed down from the bookshelf, I find that Appendix A is devoted to a short explanation of LDP along the lines of this article. William Avery (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - There are pages on Wikipedia that link to the Linux Documentation Project (for example, the article on NCurses) and which cite it as a reference. If it's good and unique enough to be considered a reference, it ought to have its own page. The proposal to delete is puzzling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.180.138.68 (talk) 00:38, 14 September 2008 (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.