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 no consensus, default to keep. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

XBMC4Xbox[edit]

XBMC4Xbox (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)

Delete Just a copy and paste of the XBMC page, stupidly huge amounts of irrelevant duplication, unnecessary to distinguish it from regular XBMC, no attempt to establish independent notability (re a project forked only a week ago or so). Sumbuddi (talk) 16:45, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. To me, the nominator's "arguments" (which do not refer much to policy) would really point to a merge+redirect. That should be discussed on the talk pages of the respective articles. However, I believe that the article could be cleaned up and could be a stand-alone article (as it is a true fork & one that has been extensively documented, satisfying WP:N). --Karnesky (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The four references that aren't old and irrelevant do not establish notability. They say 'XBMC no longer supports Xbox' and don't mention any fork. Unless there is some assertion of notability (and a copied and pasted article with dozens of references from six years ago doesn't do that), it should be deleted. From what I can see, the project has one developer, and no releases, and moreover the last XBOX build of XBMC was a year or so ago - not the version currently used on other platforms, even prior to the announcement that xbox support was being discontinued. There's nothing here that couldn't be a section in XBMC (with or without a redirect). Sumbuddi (talk) 22:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI; I have cleaned both articles, and I strongly think that they both now hold as stand-alone articles, (however I will if possible try to clean them even more) Gamester17 (talk) 15:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as an inappropriate content fork. Make a note about XBMC4Xbox in the original XBMC article if appropriate, although the fact that XBMC4Xbox has never released anything would make the appropriateness of such a note highly questionable. There is definitely no justification for this separate article, due to the absence of any reliable secondary sources that cover the topic of XBMC4Xbox in detail, as required by WP:N. —gorgan_almighty (talk) 14:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• If there is reason to note XBMC4Xbox in the original XBMC article, I would strongly encourage making a redirect instead of deleting the article. The terms of the most common development kit used to build this code make official releases impossible. The code is available and the linked articles note that the developer of XBMC4Xbox is the same person who had been making sure that the original XBMC still worked for Xbox, so I see no reason to question anything. --Karnesky (talk) 01:40, 16s nev June 2010 (UTC)

It is not the same team of people who are developing these two separate projects, the creating of a new team was part of the split, so there is a distinct separate team working on the new XBMC4Xbox project Gamester17 (talk) 15:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is the same people. Look at the projects the XBMC4Xbox team has commit access to [1][2][3] (primary source; not intended for use in the article, but I think I've seen a secondary source that indicates the same thing). --Karnesky (talk) 22:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, I see no significant coverage in reliable sources. --Nuujinn (talk) 06:32, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I am the person who split this into two separate articles and have cleaned up both articles so that they are not just simple copies of each other, (who ever said that they are "copy and paste " have not taken the time to compare the two articles). The XBMC4Xbox is a totally separate project from XBMC now, just how Boxee, MediaPortal and Plex (also forks of XBMC) are totally separate projects from from the original XBMC project. By separating these into two separate articles I have been able to cleaned the XBMC article for the original project from all the 'old' Xbox stuff which is no longer part of the original XBMC project. The fact is that the XBMC4Xbox does not only have one developer like Sumbuddi said but currently is has four developers (arnova, sholafsson, theuni, and exobuzz) as you can see listed on the SourceForge project page of people who have committed code to the SVN, and as for the releases and builds for the Xbox; for legal reasons there has never been any official releases or builds of the Xbox version of XBMC from the actual people who developing the code, all releases and builds are made by third-parties, (see the "legality" section in the article itself). Gamester17 (talk) 15:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for notability, it's XBMC for Xbox for god sake, just google xbmc AND xbox. The only thing is that the original project have been slit into two separate projects, only thing is that one kept the old name, but they could just as well both changed names into something new and then it would be much easier for people to understand that they have been split. By the way, please checkout http://www.xbmc4xbox.org which is a new unofficial fan site for this 'new' project. Gamester17 (talk) 15:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now updated the XBMC4Xbox article again, and will continue with updating the XBMC article to separate them even more Gamester17 (talk) 16:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It still looks like copy and paste to me. Stuff like 'supported video formats' are identical, not least because XBMC4Xbox has never made any releases and the supported formats are actually those of XBMC. There is no point in this article because it's still the same app. When there's notability, when there's a real difference between XBMC for Xbox (which goes at XBMC where it has been for the last how ever many years while it has been part of the project), and XBMC4Xbox, this article might make sense.

My Xbox runs XBMC. It does not run XBMC4Xbox. Nobody's Xbox runs XBMC4Xbox, because no code has been released. XBMC is notable. XBMC for the Xbox goes at XBMC. Googling 'xbmc AND xbox' will find you a tonne of content that goes at XBMC, which for most of its life has been an Xbox app. NOT for this non-notable fork. Sumbuddi (talk) 17:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

XBMC and XBMC4Xbox are not the same application, and they each have unique features and functions that the other does not. Not even the skins and addons are compatible out-of-the-box between the two applications, just try to install a skin or plugin made for XBMC on XBMC4Xbox or vice versa without first doing some heavy modifications to the code of that addon. As a former project manager of the XBMC project please trust me on this or just try for yourself to see if you can prove me wrong, they are not the same, I really do know what I am talking about. @Sumbuddi, your Xbox may run a old version of XBMC, but you are wrong that no Xbox's runs XBMC4Xbox because the source code and binaries for XBMC4Xbox is just as available as the source code for XBMC, that is both project's full source code is available on their respective project page on SourceForge, (and for reference no Xbox source code can be found on the XBMC project on SourceForge any longer, it is only available in the separate XBMC4Xbox Project). Fact is also that binaries for the old XBMC for Xbox has never been made available from the official XBMC project, you have always had to get them from independent third-parties who compile and distribute them on their own, and the same goes for XBMC4Xbox binaries which you can download today if look around the interwebs. By the way I have updated the referrers as well in the XBMC4Xbox article Gamester17 (talk) 17:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's correct that the overwhelming majority of XBMC for Xbox installations are from illegal downloads, as very few endusers are capable of compiling the code themselves. Nonetheless I still haven't seen any sources stating that XBMC4Xbox, as a forked project, is notable. Sumbuddi (talk) 18:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but trim it down a lot. It's important that there is a fork, but I'm not sure we need so much adapted detail from XBMC (even if some of it's slightly different from the current XBMC). Frankly, that article and its relatives on Wikipedia have more minutia than should be in an encyclopedia article (like all of this info on supported formats). As an example of why to avoid deletion, when Plex forked, it took a little while for the internet to catch up with reviews etc. etc. Plex has the advantage of being deployed for a growing OS/hardware base, but otherwise they are similar.Mattnad (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's important that there's a fork, that doesn't mean it needs a separate article, when an 'XBMC4Xbox' heading on the XBMC article would serve that purpose perfectly well. The differences from XBMC on other platforms would be best explained in the main XBMC, where the functionality of XBMC is explained, and the few differences/limitations can explained. It doesn't make sense to have content about XBMC *for* the Xbox on the Xbox page (explaining for instance the limitations of the Xbox version - definitely required given the history of the project), and also content about XBMC4XBox on a separate page, with a huge degree of overlap between the two. The limitations of XBMC for the XBox such as not being able to play HD video content, are going to be the same as the limitations of XBMC4Xbox. Sumbuddi (talk) 18:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now trimmed and stripped the XBMC4Xbox article even more to try to list only things that are unique to XBMC4Xbox on the Xbox, which is a lot, and I think that Xbox only stuff is too much to fit into the XBMC article under a XBMC4Xbox subsection there. Gamester17 (talk) 09:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eh??? The xbox-only stuff is an essential part of XBMC, which was originally xbox-only. The only unique content relevant to XBMC4Xbox is stuff that XBMC4Xbox does differently from XBMC. (talk) 14:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, the question is notability. Which sources of the many sources listed constitute the significant coverage in reliable sources that are required to establish notability? I've looked at most of them, nothing I've found meets that bar. What am I missing? Also, users involved in the project might take a moment to review WP:COI. --Nuujinn (talk) 18:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a content fork - material related to the XMBC4Xbox can be in the main XMBC page. Not much independent coverage and thus notability. Claritas § 07:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, Redirect or Delete. The huge number of "sources" in the article fail to obscure the fact that this XBMC4Xbox, whatever it is, has no independent notability from the XBMC. The few independent sources, specialized tech blogs, all simply say that the XBMC4Xbox is a spinoff of the XBMC. Abductive (reasoning) 07:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Recommend relisting. ----moreno oso (talk) 19:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I think that in the article as it stands, the information is useful, is difficult to trim down and requires several sections, and is largely irrelevant to the original XBMC. It looks good to me. --Farry (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is, for instance, 'XBMC4Xbox limitations' irrelevant to XBMC, when those limitations are the reason why the app originally known as 'Xbox Media Center' is no longer supported on that device? Sumbuddi (talk)

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.