Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FSF Free Software Awards


 * 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. Deor (talk) 13:48, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

FSF Free Software Awards

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This award does not appear to be notable; the only references are from the FSF itself and blogs of people who claim to have won the award. Not finding any third-party references to indicate notability. Primefac (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Significantly Shorten and Merge into Free Software Foundation DocumentError (talk) 08:51, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is poorly-sourced, but some more sources from a quick search indicate its notability and should be integrated into the article. Telegraph:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/11093317/Guns-drugs-and-freedom-the-great-dark-net-debate.html - SD Times: http://sdtimes.com/sd-times-news-digest-october-20-2014-openstack-juno-ibm-plummets-microsofts-fitness-smartwatch/ - Heise: http://www.heise.de/open/meldung/Free-Software-Awards-fuer-IPython-und-OpenMRS-1829598.html as well as what look like news articles in Russian, Japanese and Spanish. The article also exists in 9 other languages on Wikipedia, I'm not sure if any of those are in better shape. Greenman (talk) 10:27, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Shorten and Merge into Free Software Foundation - current sourcing is not sufficient to establish notability independent of the foundation. Greenman's sources are at most a few sentences of coverage of the awards, more incidental mention than significant coverage.Dialectric (talk) 17:04, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * *Weak keep. Eddymason (talk) 18:25, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * On what policy or guideline(s) are you basing this vote? Dialectric (talk) 22:01, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
 * None, really, so I've gone ahead and struck my vote. My gut says it should be either merged or moved to "list of FSF Award recipients", but this just seems like something Wikipedia would have an article on. Eddymason (talk) 22:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. These awards are regularly covered by mainstream press each year (additional examples include Network World, The Age) and are also the subject of opinion pieces (for example, in iTWire). Given that there is plenty of sources to support a non-shortened version of the article, I don't see much reason to consider merging it with Free Software Foundation. --ragesoss (talk) 04:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable coverage. -- Green  C  19:45, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per iTWire link above. It's not a reliable source for claims about the award, but it does help show notability. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The links provided by Ragesoss notable coverage. I am One of Many (talk) 07:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources shown by ragesoss demonstrate notability. The article also has sources noting the awards, example. Johnuniq (talk) 10:41, 3 December 2014 (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.