Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funtoo Linux (2nd nomination)

Funtoo Linux

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

Fails WP:GNG (could not find more specific guidelines). Gentoo derivative. Cites mostly primary sources. Was redirected to Gentoo, propose redirecting it again. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funtoo Linux Kleuske (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 19:25, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 19:25, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References added to the article.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/gentoo-and-funtoo-linux-users-can-now-enjoy-the-gnome-desktop-without-systemd-503091.shtml

References found to this topic:

I am sure the article can be made more up to date, but I don't find deleting it appropriate nor redirecting it to Gentoo/Derivative. Palica (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those are what's called "passing mentions". The first two only establish the fact that it's used, the third is mention in a list with many distros. They do not establish notability, which requires in depth coverage by independent reliable sources. This is not "in depth coverage". Kleuske (talk) 19:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Wikipedia is crammed full of mostly unsourced articles about variations and details of free computing systems, UNIX, LINUX, etc. Maybe is a synergy between free information and free software, but I like it. Prince of Thieves (talk) 20:43, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "I like it" is not a policy, as far as I'm aware, and does not establish notability. Nor does WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Kleuske (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - you are right, neither of those are policy, and I am not relying on either of those essays, I am arguing per WP:WIS. Prince of Thieves (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Prince of Thieves: And what part of Wikipedia:Introduction did you have in mind? Wikipedia:Notability requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" -- 21:47, 28 February 2018‎ [Kleuske] (unsigned)
      - I am referring to the concept of what Wikipedia is, rather than what it is not. I don't see what your comment has got to do with it or really expect anyone to agree with me. I am certainly not referring to notability. Prince of Thieves (talk) 22:15, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect. We already went through this once before and found it non-notable. The situation has not changed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - why so stubborn about old consensus. Wikipedia:CCC. softpedia - is that not a notable reliable source? Ok, and "passing mentions" - that would mean that the distro is being used even in research articles. I just don't see a need to remove the article/restore redirect. Palica (talk) 16:18, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Gentoo Linux. I have reviewed the sources and after eliminating the unreliable ones, two are left standing: [1] and [2]. The first is good. The second is only a passing mention. Not quite there yet. ~Kvng (talk) 17:28, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- if the first one is good, how many sources are needed? why aren't we there yet? what about these two articles?
  - http://www.linux-community.de/Internal/Artikel/Online-Artikel/Mein-Linux-Funtoo/Tippfehler
  - https://www.onli-blogging.de/1531/Von-Ubuntu-zu-Funtoo.html Palica (talk) 09:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]