Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dxbx


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Dxbx

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

No assertion of notability through reliable, published sources. WP:VG reliable sources search yielded zero hits. Teancum (talk) 00:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Delete per A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content) This emulator does not have any notability - and makes no claim to it in the article.  In fact, the article itself states that it doesn't work - and no games function on it.  Add to that a complete lack of sources and it seems clear this should go right away. -Addionne (talk) 00:47, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment CSD A7 does not apply to software. &mdash; HowardBGolden (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Removed speedy above.  The remainder of my argument remains the same.  That said, the article seems a bit to be conflicted as to whether it is about the collaborative online development project (web content, organization) or the software itself.  What I mean is it discusses future development plans, refers to the aim of the project as much as it does the actual function of the software, and lists all members of the development team by (user)name.  -Addionne (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Teancum, in your apparent zeal to rid the WP world of the scourge of Cxbx and friends, you have referenced Cxbx (not Dxbx) in your Google custom search. Please nominate more carefully. &mdash; HowardBGolden (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Link corrected to show the zero hits for Dxbx. --Teancum (talk) 18:11, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron.  Snotty Wong   spout 17:52, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No significant coverage in reliable sources. This emulator appears to be a work in progress, doesn't play any games, and is used by virtually no one.  Snotty Wong   verbalize 17:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Question Snotty, do you have any evidence for your assertion "is used by virtually no one"? I see 15K+ hits on Google for the words "dxbx" and "emulator" together (not the phrase "dxbx emulator"). That suggests to me a lot of interest. (I'm not saying this interest rises to the byzantine WP definition of notability; it may not.) &mdash; HowardBGolden (talk) 18:42, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Answer It's common sense. The emulator has not even been developed to the point that it plays a single game.  Therefore, I can all but guarantee that it is not used by anyone.  Unless there is a huge underground group of video game fanatics who get together every weekend to watch "introductory movies and animations" on their PC's.  Snotty Wong   communicate 21:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, for what it's worth, I only get 2,790 google hits for "dxbx" and "emulator" together, and 136 hits for "dxbx emulator" in quotes. As a point of comparison, I get 4,540 hits for and "elephant" together, and 1,180,000 hits for "flamingo" and "shart" together.  That's why google hits is an argument to avoid in deletion discussions.  Snotty Wong   prattle 21:51, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete- this article is just a version history, sourced only to the project's home page. The software doesn't run a single game and there is no indication that anyone uses it. There is no coverage in independent sources. This thing is clearly not notable. Reyk  YO!  23:27, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - See the related AfD's at Articles for deletion/Dxbx Compatibility and Articles for deletion/Cxbx. Snotty Wong   confabulate 00:12, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, no significant coverage. --Nuujinn (talk) 13:14, 24 October 2010 (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.