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. The final tally as I count it was 6 for Delete, 1 for Keep, plus 2 more Keep comments by editors who have only edited the article and this deletion debate. The one non-new editor desiring Keep had no strong argument, leaving the arguments to the two new editors. While their arguments are vociferous, they are tainted, and not terribly strong anyway. "I highly doubt that the Wikimedia Foundation would appreciate your accusations against LinuxDevices", whatever that's supposed to mean, is not a helpful comment. The article does consist, except for the how-to section, almost solely of glowing descriptions of alleged features unreferenced by disinterested third party material, and this is brought out in the arguments, as well as the point that, after all, a full release of the product does not yet exist. Stronger argument and more numbers = Delete. Herostratus 18:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AndLinux[edit]

Very obscure attempt at a linux distribution. Google test lists 566 results, mainly from mailing lists and other spammable places. Very obscure, probably spam. --Mecanismo | Talk 12:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• [andLinux] is a real Linux distribution that runs in Windows and has even been featured on [Linux Devices] and [LWN]. I am the founder of andLinux and you are more then welcome to direct any questions about the project to my email (used during registration). The link to the home page or a google search on andLinux would show several valid links for the project. I understand your questioning a project such as this, but there are real needs for people to use Linux without coming ot of Windows. Please note that I am not sure how to answer back, so i responded here. --LordDavon | 09:25, 27 August 2006 (EST)
• Addional response: I used your google search and note that the first link is to LWN and the second is to MadTux's andLinux download page (they test all distributions before adding). I also noted that your exclusion of the term "wiki" also excludes any page linking to its home page. Since andLinux is relatively new and named from typos found in a google search, excluding the home page will return several pages with typos. --David Solomon a.k.a LordDavon
  • The AndLinux distribution is yet to present that it has any notoriety or merit to deserve an article on an encyclopedia. The google test which I presented removes the reference to any wiki because wikis are vulnerable to spam and vanity attempts like this case. Nonetheless, without filtering out wikis, the google test laists a little over 700 hits. I'm not notable but my nickname earns more hits than that. Therefore it is easy to see that the AndLinuxdistribution is indeed very obscure and void of any notoriety. Moreover, it seems that it's article is just a pet article from the distribution's author, which is one more reason to delete it. Wikipedia should not be used as a vehicle for self-promotion or advertising --Mecanismo | Talk 13:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete, sounds like a very impressive Linux distro, but the article reads like an advertisement, and the distro isn't even finished yet. JIP | Talk 14:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• JIP: Thank you. I have no control over the article, but I was happy when it came out positive.
• Mecanismo: I am sure you find no fault on your part and that is just fine by me, but you really need to do your research before making statements like yours. For one, LinuxDevices may have written the article like an advertisement, but that is how they chose to write it. I like to think they were very impressed considering it was a proof of concept and the very first release. You are welcome to think however you like and following Wikipedia's own guidelines, I will continue to. Here are some things I would like to point out:
  • A wikipedia search shows 30 results of its own for LinuxDevices.
  • A LinuxDevices -wiki search returns 9,220,000 results on Google.
  • LinuxDevices is owned and operated by Ziff Davis Publishing (in the bottom right-hand corner of thier web site).
  • I highly doubt that the Wikimedia Foundation would appreciate your accusations against LinuxDevices. I suggest researching a little more in the future.
  • My google search of just andLinux returns 16,900 results. Just tossing it out there. I don't mean to argue. I have seen this corrected by clearing your cookies and cache.
  • I appreciate your work with Wikipedia and am glad that people check into invalid sites, but this is not one.
  • I didn't write this wiki page, but I am very glad someone did. I do browse around the Internet just before releasing a new version to find any issues that users may have had and came across the andLinux wiki page. I am happy that someone took the time and effort to create the page and appreciate their work.
  • I am busy preparing a new version and this has set me behind long enough. Following Wikipedia's Etiquette Rules I agree to disagree. If you would like to discuss this further, we can talk in IRC. I do not believe this is the proper forum for this discussion.
  • I do not believe Wikipedia has a stance on a sites "notoriety" to be included but feel free to correct me sometime in Wikipedia's IRC.
    • Wikipedia is not a software directory, and counting Google hits is not research. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, a tertiary source. If you want to make an argument for keeping an article on a piece of software, please cite sources to demonstrate that the software satisfies one or more of the WP:SOFTWARE criteria. If you want to write an article about your own software, the only safe way to do so is to follow the advice in User:Uncle G/On notability#Writing_about_subjects_close_to_you. Uncle G 18:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Possibly we could take the relevant parts, and merge them into a "Distros" section in Cooperative Linux. Unfortunately, I don't know if there is much to merge - I can't really tell what sets this distribution apart from the others that run on colinux. - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 06:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• theAuthor: Well, I wrote article. I wrote it just to express my enthusiasm about this project. I am just a user of andLinux, and I am NOT employeed @ LinuxDevices or any other relevant site.
  • @advertising: I wanted to present the benefits of it in a short and clear manner, also readable for people which did not have contact with linux before. Maybe I should have been looking harder @ the policy regarding external links. I changed the article, now there is just one external link, the one to the project homepage
  • @merging: should be further discussed, though in the distributions section, one is just told which ways there are to get it up and running...cellstorm, 14:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No reliable sources given/found. Wickethewok 14:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Wicketthework, as you are interested electronic music, I want to give you an idea of how useful andLinux could be for electronic musicians: Imgagine you are one, and you've heard about the intersting things happening regarding audio programs in Linux, e.g the exiting open source dj-mixprograms. But maybe you don't have the time to get well known with Linux, but want to try & use these programs. One easy solution could be andLinux. Your're up and runnig in just a few moments, the programs are also installed easily. Now you could combine sounds made with Linuxprograms with sounds of Windows-programs. Also, someone could also make a special andLinux distro with all relevant programs preinstalled& tuned... there are many possibilities to use andLinux.
  • @reliable sources: yes, there are few, its a one man show by now, but I think this will change. --cellstorm, 18:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- I found it interesting.
  • WP:AGF the guy says he didn't write the article -- trust he is telling the truth, so it is not vanity. -- Geo Swan 23:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: It just doesn't seem to be notable per WP:SOFTWARE. Heimstern Läufer 23:50, 1 September 2006 (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.