- 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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Manhattan OS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I believe the subject of this article does not meet the general notability guideline because it provides no significant coverage from reliable sources. Furthermore, I have been unable to find any significant coverage that could be added to the article. Aka042 (talk) 23:16, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete an alpha level OS based on Ubuntu which has no coverage in reliable sources.-- Whpq (talk) 16:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Maybe keep when the beta comes out.RussianReversal (talk) 20:09, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- So what you are saying is that because this project is so new that it does not need a wiki article? Drtaylor175 (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. I nominated the article for deletion because I do not believe it meets the general notability guideline. This is a Wikipedia policy that governs which subjects should be included in the project. If you read through that guideline, you may get a better picture of why I do not believe the subject should have a wikipedia article. Specifically, as I said in my nomination, I was unable to find any significant coverage in reliable sources, which is a/the requirement of the GNG. --Aka042 (talk) 17:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, thank you for responding to me. I am new to Wikipedia. I am the webmaster for Manhattan's website. One of our fans originally made us this page as we are so new to this. As for sources the only thing I personally can think of is/would be our website. However the revised site won't be live until the end of next week. I know from Googleing Manhattan OS there are blog reviews of the Alphas of the OS out there. Our current time table is a full release by 7/8/2010. In saying that I would be hoping for a stay of deletion of the page and maybe some guidance as to how I could bring it up to par to meet the guidelines. Also I will try to reach out to our community for assicance in updating and maintaining the wiki article so it will be better sourced. Thank you. Drtaylor175 (talk) 19:23, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem. The general notability guideline also requires that the sources be independent of the subject, which would exclude the web site made for the OS. Furthermore, blogs are generally considered unacceptable. I would encourage you to read over Wikipedia's verifiability and notability policies to get a better understanding of what is acceptable; you may also find the guideline on reliable sources helpful. Furthermore, since you stated that you are affiliated with the subject, you may want to check out Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy as well.
- As far as retaining the article, you are able to userfy it, which consists of making a copy in your userspace so even if this one is deleted you retain the content and can continue to work on it until it is ready for inclusion in mainspace. You can find instructions on how to do that through that userfy link. Those policy pages should give you a good idea of what is expected for an article in mainspace, however it may be that there is just not enough coverage from independent sources yet to allow for the subject's inclusion at this time.
- P.S. I added an extra indentation to your response so it is easier to find, I hope you dont mind. --Aka042 (talk) 23:37, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete I'd be fine with a keep if reliable sources were added Doc Quintana (talk) 17:24, 30 May 2010 (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.