Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flurry (screensaver)


 * 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.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 21:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Flurry (screensaver)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable Visor (talk) 10:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   —Visor (talk) 10:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, this definitely doesn't deserve an article unfortunately. Non-notable &mdash;αlεx♥mullεr 17:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this is the screensaver associated with OS X, and it was created with novel programming techniques (for a screensaver). TMC1221 (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * But hey, association with specific operating system and programming technique couldn't be an argue for notability, isn't it? Visor (talk) 23:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * week delete article has no claim to notability. Checking it seems that a Flurry is the default screansaver on Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar, which is some claim to fame. Lack of any non blog coverage tips me to delete. --Salix alba (talk) 19:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Partial merge to screensaver. Some evidence of notability but from non-reliable sources, a nearly 4 year-old stub so unlikely to ever grow past stub, still zero links to it from proper articles (the only one from article namespace is a disambig). However I'm not fond of the idea of completely deleting and losing the revision history of an article that's been around this long and has had this many edits and editors. All this suggests merging with its natural parent to me. Reduce to just a sentence or two on TMC1221's point in the screensaver article (with a ref), maybe even just in the caption of the existing image of this screensaver. If Flurry is important in the history of screensavers its has a place (in suitably reduced form) in the screensaver article. If it's not important the content will probably reduce or disappear over time with normal wikiprocess. Qwfp (talk) 12:34, 1 March 2008 (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.