Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gnuboy


 * 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   redirected to List of video game console emulators, and nominator withdrew after article was redirected. Non-admin closure.  Jamie ☆ S93  22:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Gnuboy

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

Contested prod on the grounds that apparently the links at the bottom of the page satisfy notability (links to its home page, links on the wayback machine to its home page, a project page on an open source repository, etc) Absolutely nothing which satisfies the criteria laid out in WP:NOTE which calls for significant coverage in reliable third party sources (which is not forums and blogs). Unless any can be demonstrated this doesn't belong here. Crossmr (talk) 04:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * WITHDRAW - Nomination withdrawn since article is redirected to a list.--Crossmr (talk) 12:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I apologize for generating a conflict of interest as I originally did. - Gilgamesh (talk) 13:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. Everybody makes mistakes its our ability to learn from them that makes a good editor.--Crossmr (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete — this looks a lot like many of the video game articles out there. In addition, this borders on WP:ADVERT. MuZemike (talk) 05:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - gnuboy is actually the most widely ported Game Boy Classic emulator, having been widely ported especially to PDAs, cell phones and game console homebrew platforms as Free Software, and is included for Debian and listed at the Free Software Foundation software directory and at Zophar's Domain (including an entire section for gnuboy saved state archives). However, since I was both one of the programmers and originally wrote the article (I've been active on Wikipedia in general for years), I did initially dispute the article's neutrality for its tone (after I myself had originally written it), and it's been cleaned up somewhat, but tone is still an issue.  The article ought to be cleaned up by an editor other than myself.  I vote that it is notable, but if it is not notable enough to stand as its own article, then maybe merge with other articles listing relevant emulation software...or something like that.  But gnuboy had far-reaching influences in Game Boy emulation until the arrival of VisualBoyAdvance, and still has far-reaching influences for its many ports to platforms VBA is not conveniently ported too.  If emulators like ZSNES can have their own articles, then I believe gnuboy deserves its own article too.  But it certainly needs cleaning, for sure. - Gilgamesh (talk) 13:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC) Merge with List of emulators.  Also examine Category:Game Boy emulators.  I am also too close to this topic.  I am willing to help, but I want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. - Gilgamesh (talk) 06:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I just added a ton of relevant third party links to the external links section...some of them are probably more appropriately references than external links. I was just incredibly alarmed that this article was actually nominated for deletion.  I thought I'd done enough work even before this, so I scrambled to gather more relevant links, endeavouring not to collect links from forums or blogs. - Gilgamesh (talk) 13:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * None of those meet the criteria laid out in WP:NOTE. None of them are significant coverage by reliable third party sources. There are thousands of packages included in debian, and very few of them are truly notable. Its inclusion on sites and lists which lists thousands of other software does nothing to establish its notability. To establish its notability it either has to have won a notable award or be covered significantly by reliable sources. That kind of coverage would include a news article (maybe in wired?), a review or something, in a reliable source (not a forum, blog, etc) that would cover the subject exclusively or almost exclusively (name drops, a passing sentence or two doesn't quite cut it). You might also want to read WP:COI as you're obviously very close to the subject. The deletion nomination isn't anything personal. Some things just aren't appropriate for wikipedia.--Crossmr (talk) 14:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I did once recall a review on a website dedicated to Linux gaming, but I don't remember the URL and the website may be gone by now. Either way, I couldn't find it in Google.  Perhaps I am too close to this topic.  I honestly never intended to create a conflict of interest, to advertise or to self-promote&mdash;in fact I only thought of that after the fact, which is why I distributed the NPOV of the article shortly after I wrote it (how often do editors dispute the NPOV of their own edits?).  I was newer to Wikipedia back then (a couple years then as opposed to the approximately half decade I've been here now), and gnuboy was certainly notable to me.  That said, I'm changing my vote.  If gnuboy is relegated to a list of programs on most websites, then it might as well be relegated to a list of software items on other pages of Wikipedia. - Gilgamesh (talk) 06:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've changed the article to a redirect. - Gilgamesh (talk) 12:05, 28 August 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.