Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of X Window System desktop environments


 * 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.  Sandstein  12:03, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Comparison of X Window System desktop environments

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable i.e. fails WP:LISTN. Also fails WP:NOT e.g. WP:IINFO and WP:NOTSPAM as this seems like an advertisement of one company's products which is in no way notable. Declined PROD. w umbolo  ^^^  10:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete Wikipedia is not review website and this article fails all relevant tests for lists. Lovelylinda1980 (talk) 12:53, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you reason - which tests and how, and why strong? There's sources on the comparison, and it's free software so it's not some commercial spam listing. Widefox ; talk 23:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Article is entirely original research. Not a single source is cited that compares X Window System desktop environments. WP:NUKEANDPAVE applies here. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 17:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:30, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:30, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * User:FenixFeather there's sources (below). Sources don't have to be in the article, they just have to exist per WP:BEFORE the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination, so this is a failure of BEFORE by the nom (see my comment below for other issues with it). Widefox ; talk 11:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Why do you insist on stalking my AFD votes and making a broad claim about "sources" where none exist? Please point out these so called sources that discuss the comparison of X Window desktop environments. Because right now this page is just a violation of WP:NOTMANUAL, WP:SYNTH, and WP:OR. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 20:19, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I pinged you to point your attention to the multiple RS listed by another editor below, which directly refutes the reasoning for your !vote. (this disruption is offtopic here and should be discussed at WP:ANI). Widefox ; talk 11:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Incubate in draft space. X Window System desktop environments (often referred to as "Linux desktop environments", since the X Window System is the default windowing system for most Linux distributions) meet WP:LISTN, since they're discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources (e.g. PC World, ZDNet, TechRadar). However, the sourcing of this article falls short. If moved to draft space, I'll gladly volunteer to improve the page to article space standards. —  Newslinger  talk   11:55, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Because there are more interested editors than I expected, I think the article's sourcing can be improved quickly enough that moving it to draft space is not necessary. "Incubate" would be my second choice. —  Newslinger  talk   05:28, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Draftify The topic is notable, and the content looks good enough to build upon, but the sourcing is inadequate. (Since the software under discussion tilts toward the Linux side of the world, having the list degenerate into a product catalog isn't a major concern: most items listed won't have dollar prices at all.) If we have a volunteer willing to take it on, then shuffling it off to draft space is an acceptable course of action. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Whether a catalog list is promotional or not is irrelevant, see WP:NOTCATALOG. Either it's notable and there exist reliable sources, or it's deleted. w umbolo   ^^^  17:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * User:XOR'easter there's sources (above), and see my comment (below). Widefox ; talk 11:55, 17 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep / Speedy Keep, can be improved so WP:SURMOUNTABLE. There's sources above for the comparison and I see no reason to take out of mainspace to improve, it's been there since 2006‎. (WP:OTHERSTUFF disclaimer - this is only like Comparison of X window managers) Widefox ; talk 16:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC) (improved - done)  Widefox ; talk 12:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment nom is misleading - these are free software items, not commercial products. If the consensus is to incubate, then that's odd considering it's been around since 2006, and seemingly similar to Comparison of X window managers. With zero switching cost, it may be WP:USEFUL (an argument to avoid) for readers, hence the popularity of DistroWatch. Widefox ; talk 23:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep – this is a valid summary-style article for different open source desktop environments. Sourcing for each of the items in the list can be added from the appropriate article page. If some of the items shouldn't be on the list, that's an editorial decision that can be discussed on the talk page. Proposing this 12-year-old page for deletion as an "advertisement of one company's products" is clearly a nomination done in bad faith. Brad  v  23:40, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * There's discussion at WP:ANI over this disruption. Widefox ; talk 00:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Shame on both of you for characterizing as malice what can easily be ignorance. Have you ever considered that people might have different perspectives from you? Not everyone knows what X is, you know. To someone unfamiliar with this stuff, it could easily come off as promotional. And who says free software can't have promoters? You are worsening WP:Systemic bias by accusing those who don't have the same knowledge and perspective as you to be acting in "bad faith". – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 20:23, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , Excuse me? Are you doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing? Brad  v  20:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * What? Accusing you of acting in bad faith? No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm saying you shouldn't assume bad faith when someone could simply be mistaken about the topic. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 20:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , Shame on both of you for characterizing as malice what can easily be ignorance. That's an accusation of bad faith. I explained that this is a valid summary-style article, that it's a list of open source articles and therefore not the products of one company, and that the nominator should have been able to gather that just from reading the article. Brad  v  20:36, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't? That's just me expressing my disapproval of how you accused Wumbolo of acting in bad faith. Accusing you of bad faith would be something like "Bradv is clearly here to promote X window desktop managers, and their opinion should be disregarded". I'm allowed to say that you overstepped when you accused Wumbolo of acting in bad faith. "No you" isn't going to save you, here, and is just a form of whataboutism. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 20:43, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , if you're not accusing me of voting in bad faith, then I don't understand the point of this thread. I stand by my !vote. Brad  v  20:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The point of this thread was to call you out for not following WP:AGF and perpetuating WP:Systemic bias. Was that not obvious? Why would I accuse you of acting in bad faith? I'm so confused. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 20:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * your WP:BATTLEGROUND is similar to Wumbolo and not conducive here, and obvious to all an AGF violation, plus WP:OFFTOPIC. Both you and Wumbolo should take up some systemic bias correction elsewhere, done properly with consensus. There's no consensus here for these deletions, despite all this heat, which is why others have taken Wumbolo to ANI (clue not me). It's a time waster. Widefox ; talk 20:59, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Explain to me how trying to reduce systemic bias is a violation of AGF. I believe that it's a serious issue that's limiting the quality of the project. Are you denying the reality and importance of systemic bias? I'm not even using systemic bias as a justification for deletion here; I just think it's a dick move to accuse someone of acting in bad faith for mistakenly assuming all X window desktop managers come from the same company. – FenixFeather</b> (talk) (Contribs) 21:02, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * , dick move that's not AGF. Brad  v  21:05, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Jesus, why do you insist on believing that I don't think you're acting in good faith? Look, I believe that you're here to help the project, or you wouldn't have more than 20k edits. I'm just trying to get you to understand that it's uncalled for to say someone's acting in bad faith just because they got something wrong. Does that make sense? – <b style="color:SlateBlue">FenixFeather</b> (talk) (Contribs) 21:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * (ec) That's a straw man. See WP:AFDEQ, and WP:FANATIC / WP:BRINK. Does Wumbolo share this systemic bias viewpoint? I see both of you have been at similar AfDs, and articles. Widefox ; talk 21:14, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, I'm the only one who's been actively pointing out systemic bias in tech articles. – <b style="color:SlateBlue">FenixFeather</b> (talk) (Contribs) 22:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And to reply to ...mistakenly assuming all X window desktop managers come from the same company - he AfDed it! WP:BEFORE is way beyond reading the article. Widefox ; talk 21:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not readily apparent to someone unfamiliar to the topic area. You could conceivably read the whole article and think that "X Window system" is a product, and that the article is promoting various desktop environments for it. It's not enough evidence to immediately jump to the conclusion that the user is trying to sabotage Wikipedia. All I'm trying to do is point out that you're privileged with technical knowledge but aren't willing to see this issue from the perspective of someone who doesn't have that same knowledge. – <b style="color:SlateBlue">FenixFeather</b> (talk) (Contribs) 22:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Mass deleting without even reading? Continuing after being asked to stop? See WP:COMPETENCE editors who are unintentionally and often unknowingly disruptive while trying to help and WP:LISTEN. You are labelling others and making AGF violations, in a self-righteous way against the consensus at these AfDs. All this is offtopic here - continue at ANI please. Widefox ; talk 01:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No consensus yet. Relisting since it has been eight days since the discussion was opened.
 * Keep Changing opinion per Newslinger. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I believe the topic is notable and reliable sources will be able to be found for most of its claims. SJK (talk) 06:05, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: As there is some possibility this is one of a number of articles where a non-admin closure might be regarded as controversial can I respectfully request non-admins closure by admins only. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:13, 21 September 2018 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:35, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Striker force Talk 15:52, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Update I added 17 reliable sources to the article, which include TechRadar, ZDNet, PC World, linux.com, Datamation, NetworkWorld, Lifehacker so the abundance of RS easily suppasses two per WP:GNG. If anyone wants to challenge any of those, each one could be replaced by more - there's a sheer abundance of sources out there - there's probably hundreds. This puts a spotlight on the nom and first comments, as sources don't have to be in the article per policy WP:NEXIST. Widefox ; talk 12:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per the sources mentioned above and those added by Widefox (nice work!). The parent topic is highly notable, most of the list entries have articles or sections, and the added sources provide content for comparison of these desktop environments. All that leads to a clear keep. -- 17:28, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep article passes WP:LISTN now. – <b style="color:SlateBlue">FenixFeather</b> (talk) (Contribs) 22:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.