Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loki (PyIM)


 * 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 speedy delete CSD G7 author's request. Kimchi.sg 03:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Loki (PyIM)

 * NN piece of software still in development. J Milburn 22:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * what is 'NN', and why is this page up for deletion after only 3 minutes of life? --Hainesc 22:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment NN stands for Not Notable, per Wikipedia Guidelines found here: WP:NOT Alphachimp  talk  22:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. We're not a crystal ball (WP:NOT). Alphachimp  talk  22:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, but this is a valid, Existing project that should be known about. IMHO. --Hainesc 23:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Of course it should be heard about, just not here. Wikipedia is not free webhosting. Alphachimp  talk  23:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Very well. No projects in planning phase, I guess.  So, at what point in development does this project become notable? --Hainesc 23:16, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * After (a) is actually exists, and (b) a lot of people know about it. Fan-1967 00:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Referencing 'Not a crystal ball' philosophy, last paragraph: "Forward-looking articles about unreleased products (e.g. movies, games, etc.) require special care to make sure that they are not advertising." Therefore I request that a carefull eye examine the page to ensure that it is not advertising (which I think is a pointless effort for a GPL'ed project).  However the policy does not prohibit the existance of forward looking pages. --Hainesc 23:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The "foward-looking articles" is about notable projects in development that have already attracted widespread interest, like Pirates of the Caribbean 3. This doesn't compare, so it's crystal ball. Fan-1967 00:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I rescind my original vote on grounds of the proposed guidelines for software credibility. --Hainesc 03:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete has your software been mentioned elsewhere before, regardless of whether it's still in development? No? Then you don't deserve an article here yet, sorry. Kimchi.sg 02:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I mean no disrespect to you when I say this, but I am fairly certain this is another mention. Quite credible as it is the proof of its existence. A Primary Source Document from a credible source  on this projects existence. --Hainesc 3:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete because of it is not a notable piece of software yet. --Hainesc 03:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That makes it Speedy Delete per author's request. So tagged. Fan-1967 03:26, 18 July 2006 (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.