Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Budgie (desktop environment)


 * 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.  So Why  15:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Budgie (desktop environment)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It does not have notability and reliable sources. Editor-1 (talk) 05:23, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. —Syrenka V (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:47, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Reliable sources do appear to exist: ZDNet InfoWorld Datamation and possibly OCS-Mag (the author for the last can be identified by name from the OCS-Mag Editors Page, though he uses a pseudonym in the article itself). The nominator cannot be blamed for not having done WP:BEFORE diligence on all of these, as some are so recent that they were published after the nomination! But they still establish notability and provide material to incorporate into the article. —Syrenka V (talk) 23:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:27, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article in current issue of the c't magazine (in German) on Budgie (within Solus) --Brevity (talk) 20:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Update on sourcing: I've added all of the sources mentioned above, as well as a few more I found in the meantime. The availability of suitable sourcing should no longer be in doubt. Incidentally, the journal cited by has its own Wikipedia article: c't. The Datamation source mentioned above had unaccountably disappeared from the web for a while[!], but is now back—and has been archived. The OCS-Mag reference is wrongly linked above; the correct link is here—and referenced in the page.
 * —Syrenka V (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2017 (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.