Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Netz

Non-notable ("175 users worldwide"). -- Grunt (talk) 15:26, 2004 Aug 20 (UTC)
 * KEEP. In the world of operating systems userbase is NOT a measure of notability. For example you may not heard of tron but it has a huge userbase. Lets not forget Multics which has NO USERS but has an article. Please supply a proper reason to delete. Further more this article was listed here withing THREE MINUTES of being written. Please give more time, like a week. User:Krik 15:46, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Why does your User link direct one to Meta? (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Meta-krik). DO you have an account here on Wikipedia?  Anyway, delete.  RickK 19:23, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Appears not notable.  If it is notable, the article should explain why.  A waiting period is built into VfD. Tuf-Kat 17:23, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of existence. Probable nonsense. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 19:20, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Patent nonsense. Elf-friend
 * Delete. I have heard much about Tron and am quite aware of the historical importance of Multics. The author has five days to improve the article enough to convince me and others that Netz deserves its own article or that at least some of the information ought to be preserved in some other article. If the author can't explain why Netz is important, it probably isn't. Jallan 22:42, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * What about all the other low user base operating systems listed at List of operating systems How about the fictional operatinging systems listed on this page? Should I flood VFD with them as well? Wiki is not paper, and there is a large community of interesting and exotic operating systems out there. User:Krik 22:55, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * You still haven't answered as to why you don't have a User page. RickK 19:38, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: If there are other operating system articles that should be deleted, list them on VfD. I usually take the WINP argument as an unwitting admission that an article should not be kept. There are indeed many interesting and exotic operating systems, and interesting and exotic inventions of all kinds, and interesting and exotic phonetic alphabet systems, and interesting and exotic replacements for Unicode, and interesting and exotic new scientific theories and so forth. Some of them may deserve a reference within an article or may get it anyway, as an example. They don't all deserve an article. Most don't. Why does NETZ deserve an article? Jallan 18:14, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete; fails Google test. It must be an extremely new, extremely threadbare operating system if it was built in Mono. Maybe in time, but at the moment it sounds like a pipe dream. Even if it were only on usenet, it would pass the Google test. Wikipedia is not paper, but it's not a fantasyland either. But hey, five days. --Golbez 23:41, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Advert, non-notable. Just a list of system reqs and a list of apps (a grand total of 10 apps, including Hello World?). And how can you have an interpreted OS...or rather why?&mdash;it'd have to run on an existing OS, so what's the point? Just somebody's pet project.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 05:37, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have my doubts that it even exists. I tried to find evidence for its existence, but failed so my vote is to delete for lack of verifiability. If it exists, the article is original research. And who is David Gebler? (please do not mistake this for a vanity page request ;-). David Remahl 18:13, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)