Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bareos


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Bareos

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable software. Almost no independent coverage; I found one source. Largoplazo (talk) 18:28, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Regarding notability and sources:
Gul.maikat (talk) 10:08, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Bareos was already mentioned in at least 5 articles on en.wikipedia, before the Bareos article itself was started, now linked to the article.
 * Bareos article on French Wikipedia exists since April 2016
 * External media coverage include (listed on the links / reference list of the article):
 * Admin Magazine
 * Admin Magazine (German)
 * Bareos coverage at Linux Magazine (German edition), several print and online articles since 2013
 * Bareos 16.2 review at iX (magazine), issue 11/2016, p. 25
 * Bareos coverage at de:Pro-Linux, since 2013 various articles, last about 16.2 release
 * Bareos review at Russian habrahabr technology site
 * Bareos coverage at Russian Linux.org.ru with several articles 2014-2016
 * Ubuntu Server 16.04 LTS - Das umfassende Handbuch, Rheinwerk Verlag, ISBN 978-3-8362-4260-8, Pages 831-910: Backup heterogener Umgebungen mit »Bareos«, (German)
 * Linux-Server, Galileo Computing (by Charly Kühast and de:Peer Heinlein), ISBN 978-3-8362-3020-9, Pages 262-278: Backup und Recovery mit Bacula/Bareos. (German)
 * Other references
 * Bareos coverage at Russian OpenNet (website): http://www.opennet.ru/opennews/art.shtml?num=45399
 * Other references
 * In December 2015 the inter-ministerial working group on free software of the French government (Socle Interministériel de logiciel libre) included Bareos on their recommendation list among 130 other open source programs.
 * Numerous (video-)blog posts about Bareos, here just some examples
 * Google search for 'bareos' lists > 60k results
 * Independent open source platform Open Hub affirms "High Activity" of the project.
 * International conferences (excerpt) with presentations about Bareos:
 * Niels de Vos from Red Hat and Gluster co-maintainer at Open Source Backup Conference about Bareos and Gluster
 * Bareos integration with open source tools at the Open Source Data Center Conference, Berlin, 2016: https://www.netways.de/index.php?id=3445#c44177
 * Bareos presentation at Paris Open World Forum 2013
 * Bareos presentation at FOSDEM, Brussels, 2014
 * Bareos presentation at Linux Professional Institute Europe meeting at Munich 2013
 * Bareos presentation on Red Hat's DevConf.cz, Brno, 2016

Gul.maikat (talk) 14:54, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Notability for inclusion in Wikipedia can be based only on reliable sources, not number of Google hits. Admin Magazine, Linux Magazin and OpenNet news may be reliable sources - I will review these later and try to find more, if there are any... Pavlor (talk) 10:23, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Source mini-review:
 * Linux Magazin - seems to be reliable source, several short news about article subject = useable source
 * iX/heise.de - behind pay-wall, if most of the article is about Bareos = good source; if passing mention only = weak source
 * pro-linux.de - few news about article subject, seems to be one-man news page = somewhat weak source
 * Admin magazine - written of authors of Bareos = weak source
 * habrahabr.ru - seems to be blog = weak source
 * Conclusion: No good reliable sources - or only one (iX, hard to say, how broad coverage is there) and several short news (Linux Magazin). There is some coverage in reliable sources, but still too few, I fear. Pavlor (talk) 15:42, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment The number Google gives at the top is meaningless. If you page through the search results, you find out how many distinct sources Google will actually show you. In this case, at this moment, it's 169. As for the presentations, notability doesn't come from people presenting their projects at conferences, but from evidence in independent reliable sources (not, generally, blog posts) that others have taken note of them, possibly as a result of those presentations. Largoplazo (talk) 11:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Added another magazine and online-site(s). The wide range of international conferences with Bareos presentations (not only by Bareos project members) but also by recognized speakers from companies like Red Hat, Universities or Max Planck Society, shows that the experts at the conferences' program committees see Bareos at least at 'notable'. Gul.maikat (talk) 11:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - the admin-magazine piece is a detailed one, but look at the authors: two guys from Bareos, not an WP:INDY source. The fr wiki points to which (although a passing mention) is a list of free software that the French administration is encouraged to use (by opposition to proprietary software); but Bareos' status in there is "O, in observation" which probably means the "administration modernization guys" are considering to use it in the future, not even recommending it right now. And the Linux-Magazin hits seem to all be very passing mentions.  Tigraan Click here to contact me 15:52, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Shame on me, I missed authors of the Admin Magazine article. Pavlor (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem, that's the kind of thing AfD is supposed to dig up. Also, may I respectfully suggest you take a look at WP:REDACT, which you do not seem to be aware of? Tigraan Click here to contact me 18:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I know WP:REDACT, I only forget to use it... I think I will leave it as it is now. With my weak skills, I could add even more mess. I will be more careful next time. Pavlor (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I, too, didn't think to check the authors on that article, which is the one I did cite in my deletion proposal. Thanks for catching it. Largoplazo (talk) 18:50, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment added 3 more references, all German. An Admin Magazin article by an author not from Bareos, and two books, both with chapter about Bareos (80 pages and 16 pages) joerg.steffens
 * Keep Looking at the references above, I see among others:
 * iX as IT professionals journal has a small but dedicated article about Bareos version 16.2.
 * 2 articles in Admin-Magazine (1 from project members but accepted by the editors, which shows that editors find the subject 'notable', plus another dedicated and multi-pages article by an independent author)
 * small, but dedicated and continuous (2013-2016) news-articles in Linux Magazine (online)
 * broad coverage in 2 printed books (both referenced above, written by recognized open source authors / journalists)
 * continuous news-items and articles in the two leading Russian open source portals OpenNet (website) and Linux.org.ru.
 * Program committees of several international recognized open source conferences accepted Bareos presentations from project members and others (IT Professionals, Universities, Max-Planck-Institutes, Red Hat)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Dialectric (talk) 18:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete promotional spam and a classic case of WP:BOMBARDMENT. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 17:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)