Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AbsoluteTelnet (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep.  MBisanz  talk 00:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

AbsoluteTelnet
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Per consensus at DRV this article has been relisted to discuss whether the new sources put forward in the DRV overcome the reasons for deleting in the previous AFD. As this is a procedural nomination by the closing admin I have no opinion in this matter, Spartaz Humbug! 15:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The proffered sources are:
 * Centrify article on Single Sign On with Absolutetelnet
 * Applications that implement IDNA on verisign.com
 * Unicode enabled applications resource page on unicode.org
 * AbsoluteTelnet known interoperable with Quest OpenSSH with SingleSignOn
 * AbsoluteTelnet single sign on using SecureLogin on novel.com
 * CNET (4.5 stars with 37 votes and over half a million downloads) must count for something
 * List of programs that use GNU Fribidi on fribidi.org
 * AbsoluteTelnet article on isp-planet.com
 * These also print sources were alsoi submitted during the AFD
 * (page 622 "Absolute Telnet").
 * Windows XP Power Productivity found via google book search
 * The Web Wizard's guide to Perl and CGI
 * Novell NetWare 6.5 Administrator's Handbook
 * --Brian Pence (talk) 18:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - notability threshold met with additional sources, however it should be re-written to reflect sources and notability reasons. If this not done by the time this AfD is closed then speedy delete, as no claim of notability is made in the article.--Cerejota (talk) 03:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 03:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 03:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 03:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  -- Cerejota (talk) 03:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per the sources mentioned above, especially the number of downloads, which indicates a notable user base. Also keep per the spirit of the Notability policies for articles on open-source software discussion on WikiEN-l. Dandv (talk) 08:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is commercial software, not free software.--Cerejota (talk) 14:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:21, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I've updated the article with these and other references. Any comment?--Brian Pence (talk) 22:22, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient reliable sources are now listed. Deleting this article would not improve Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dandv (talk • contribs) 07:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I think the ISP Planet article is the best source as it is actually a full article about the product. I am not too keen on the non-RS reviews. I remain worried about the potential COI with Brian writing about his own product. I would like to see him get it to a basic state which acceptable and then leave it for others to expand on. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.