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.
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
assume good faith on the part of others and to
sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
Delete. Also agree with nom's reasons for deletion. In regards to
Manoj Nair, having a page already posted on an international Wikipedia page does not necessarily prove notability.
WillPeppers (
talk)
03:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep. Notability mentioned in
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LineageOS as derivative work (fork). Creator being recognized veteran in open source community as creator of Mandriva Linux - both already on Wikipedia. Edit: as per comments from
Ian.thomson and
Elmidae below, professionally-published mainstream journalistic references shall be added to article to better qualify notability. Following selected original articles covering /e/ in an independently are probably good candidates:
Keep. I disagree with the delete arguments above: notability is real: just search for "e mobile os eelo" (with former name) and you can see the number of press articles released in many different countries and different languages. In this regard there is a press review about the project at: [2]. Additionnally "beta" is not an argument for deletion. Many projects remain in beta for years and that is not related with their notability.
Indidea (
talk)
08:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)—
Indidea (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Note@
Patrick lp,
Indidea,
Amitkma,
Olivierd13,
FranckLefevre, and
Alexletroll: Notability is established by
citingprofessionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the subject but not dependent upon nor affiliated with it. Being mentioned as a derivative work of a notable subject does not qualify it for notability because they are not specifically about this subject. Press releases are useless because they're not independent. Forums and Youtube videos are useless because anyone can start those up. Saying that there are papers out there doesn't do any good if they're not cited. These reasons are why your keep !votes (this process is not actually about the number of votes) are going to be ignored when the consensus is determined. If you want to really establish a consensus of "keep," you will need to cite professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about /e/ but not dependent upon nor affiliated with it.
Ian.thomson (
talk)
04:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)reply
With ref to the above Note comment from
Ian.thomson I would like to mention that references to /e/ or eelo as it was know earlier are there in the following newspapers. Indian Express [4] LiveMint[5] The Deccan Chronicle [6] The register of UK[7]The Irish times[8] These references are all provided in the article.
Manoj Nair (
talk)
07:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep The meatpuppeting here is obvious and annoying, but there's no point in having a suitable article topic suffer for the morals of its proponents. What with the additional sources that cover the OS under the previous name of eelo, sufficient coverage appears to have been shown. Note that ref bombing has not actually improved the article much but made it look somewhat desperate - please be selective. --Elmidae (
talk ·
contribs)
20:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete - I think this is a case of TOOSOON. It is not notable yet. Once it's released and gets external coverage, it should be reconsidered. My suspicion from the above comments is this article was meatpuppeted.
Skirts89 (
talk)
20:56, 6 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep - notability is obvious even if the project is only one year old. I disagree with Skirts89 for two reasons: there is already a long track record of international press coverage for this project, and it has already been released in September: installable ROM for 49 different devices and specific online services including online drive, mail, meta-search engine etc. And being released as beta doesn't qualify for TOOSOON.
Caliwing (
talk)
13:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)—
Caliwing (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. 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.
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.
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
assume good faith on the part of others and to
sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
Delete. Also agree with nom's reasons for deletion. In regards to
Manoj Nair, having a page already posted on an international Wikipedia page does not necessarily prove notability.
WillPeppers (
talk)
03:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep. Notability mentioned in
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LineageOS as derivative work (fork). Creator being recognized veteran in open source community as creator of Mandriva Linux - both already on Wikipedia. Edit: as per comments from
Ian.thomson and
Elmidae below, professionally-published mainstream journalistic references shall be added to article to better qualify notability. Following selected original articles covering /e/ in an independently are probably good candidates:
Keep. I disagree with the delete arguments above: notability is real: just search for "e mobile os eelo" (with former name) and you can see the number of press articles released in many different countries and different languages. In this regard there is a press review about the project at: [2]. Additionnally "beta" is not an argument for deletion. Many projects remain in beta for years and that is not related with their notability.
Indidea (
talk)
08:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)—
Indidea (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Note@
Patrick lp,
Indidea,
Amitkma,
Olivierd13,
FranckLefevre, and
Alexletroll: Notability is established by
citingprofessionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the subject but not dependent upon nor affiliated with it. Being mentioned as a derivative work of a notable subject does not qualify it for notability because they are not specifically about this subject. Press releases are useless because they're not independent. Forums and Youtube videos are useless because anyone can start those up. Saying that there are papers out there doesn't do any good if they're not cited. These reasons are why your keep !votes (this process is not actually about the number of votes) are going to be ignored when the consensus is determined. If you want to really establish a consensus of "keep," you will need to cite professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about /e/ but not dependent upon nor affiliated with it.
Ian.thomson (
talk)
04:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)reply
With ref to the above Note comment from
Ian.thomson I would like to mention that references to /e/ or eelo as it was know earlier are there in the following newspapers. Indian Express [4] LiveMint[5] The Deccan Chronicle [6] The register of UK[7]The Irish times[8] These references are all provided in the article.
Manoj Nair (
talk)
07:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep The meatpuppeting here is obvious and annoying, but there's no point in having a suitable article topic suffer for the morals of its proponents. What with the additional sources that cover the OS under the previous name of eelo, sufficient coverage appears to have been shown. Note that ref bombing has not actually improved the article much but made it look somewhat desperate - please be selective. --Elmidae (
talk ·
contribs)
20:20, 6 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete - I think this is a case of TOOSOON. It is not notable yet. Once it's released and gets external coverage, it should be reconsidered. My suspicion from the above comments is this article was meatpuppeted.
Skirts89 (
talk)
20:56, 6 December 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep - notability is obvious even if the project is only one year old. I disagree with Skirts89 for two reasons: there is already a long track record of international press coverage for this project, and it has already been released in September: installable ROM for 49 different devices and specific online services including online drive, mail, meta-search engine etc. And being released as beta doesn't qualify for TOOSOON.
Caliwing (
talk)
13:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)—
Caliwing (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. 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.