Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GreenGnome


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 20:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

GreenGnome

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

This appears to be a spin-off of GNOME for Microsoft Windows. It's not clear how this is notable. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 15:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. On an unrelated note, the nom has an awesome username. Joe Chill (talk) 22:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't delete it ! GreenGnome is not a spin-off of GNOME. There are many shell replacements on Wikipedia as GreenGnome with less coverage but there aren't propose for deletion.

I can't find any reason for deletion in this list!

Daryl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.105.48.199 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Copyright violations and other material violating Wikipedia's non-free content criteria
 * Vandalism, including inflammatory redirects, pages that exist only to disparage their subject, patent nonsense, or gibberish
 * Advertising or other spam without relevant content (but not an article about an advertising-related subject)
 * Content forks (unless a merger or redirect is appropriate)
 * Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and articles that are themselves hoaxes (but not articles describing notable hoaxes)
 * Articles for which all attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed
 * Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP and so forth)
 * Articles that breach Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons
 * Redundant or otherwise useless templates
 * Categories representing overcategorization
 * Images that are unused, obsolete, or violate fair-use policy
 * Any other use of the article, template, project, or user namespace that is contrary to the established separate policy for that namespace.
 * Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia
 * Comment Have you read WP:OTHERSTUFF and Notability_(organizations_and_companies)? I believe the question is notability, and the existence or non-existence of an article about another software project is not helping to establish notability of this project. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 22:29, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Not notable Whitespider23 (talk) 19:06, 2 September 2009 (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.