Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GNU-Darwin


 * 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 redirect to Darwin (operating system) as a reasonable search term. ansh 666 03:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

GNU-Darwin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a long standing page for what seems to be a non-notable vanity project with no reliable sources to speak of. No coverage anywhere else that I can find except for press releases and an OSNews article written by the guy who started the project, which I assume all count as primary sources. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge into the Darwin (operating system) section. This article just doesn't seem like it'll ever be anything greater than a stub. Nuke (talk) 13:06, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * What can be merged though? There is nothing here that can be attributed to anything except Primary Sources. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:11, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep  and  in addition to the OS News source you mentioned. &mdash; cnzx  21:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * LOL. Love that second source. "I tried this thing, it didn't work, but it exists." AlistairMcMillan (talk) 22:31, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * So apparently being a "good" piece of software is now also a prerequisite for having an article? &mdash; cnzx  02:25, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:10, 23 December 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge and redirect. Of the links provided above, the first one has very limited coverage, the second one is a blog post and thus probably inadmissible, and the third one is a passing mention which only provides trivial coverage.--greenrd (talk) 08:06, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable and all references primary. Even though it has been suggested to be merged into Darvin lack of references make this a candidate for deletion. Hagennos (talk) 06:41, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:00, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The lack of notable sources and the material in the article itself would appear to indicate that it is a vanity project with limited public support. I don't see further research for sources redeeming the article from it being deleted.Knox490 (talk) 02:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Neither the article nor a search on Google could bring up any independent sources covering this product in any meaningful way. As the nom states, what info there is online seems to have published by the software creator. Does not seem to meet WP:NSOFT. Happy to see a redirect if there's an appropriate page to send it to.  Nick Moyes (talk) 12:07, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment German "Linux Magazin" magazine published solid looking article about GNU-Darwin in 2001/04 issue (monthly column by Georg C. F. Greve): . Other than that, I found only short news (heise.de, pro-linux.de, root.cz etc.). Pavlor (talk) 10:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Darwin (operating system) as this is ultimately a non-Apple version of Darwin and brief mention in the main article is appropriate. Due to the lack of sources, it would be hard to actually merge content from here. Personally I would restrict any description on the main article to 2 sentences or less.--DreamLinker (talk) 05:03, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, just to clarify. This is not a non-Apple version of Darwin. This is the FreeBSD packaging system (created by someone else) that was ported to run on Darwin. That may or may not work. That doesn't seem to have any support. That doesn't seem to have been updated for years. That doesn't seem to have been worked on in years. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I should have pointed to this in the start. Back in 2011 people are posting to their discussion forum asking for help because ports don't compile and the lead developer is responding with "Development is on hiatus until replacements for the proprietary drivers can be found" "Many of the ports will require much hacking. We are not distributing changes until replacements for the proprietary drivers can be found." and that's pretty much the last genuine activity on the discussion forums (or mailing lists barring spam emails). https://sourceforge.net/p/gnu-darwin/discussion/49372/thread/c448f3b5/ AlistairMcMillan (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2018 (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.