Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Observer (Software)


 * 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 keep. John254 02:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Observer (Software)

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

Non-notable software with a large dollop of WP:COI ukexpat (talk) 01:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The article is intended to be informational for completeness rather than for promotion. It seemed sensible to create a page for the software when adding it to the lists of NMS software. Adamathefrog (talk) 01:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd also say that the software does fill a quite a unique niche, hence mentioning the design goals in the article, which may make it notable, though again that's not the reason for the article's creation. Adamathefrog (talk) 01:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Certainly notable - maybe its just some people do not understand geek-language. And I certainy cant see anything that promotes the software. Fattyjwoods  ( Push my button  ) 02:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. A quick web search finds various independent commentary; the article needs to have this. Also, shouldn't the title be changed to have a lower-case 's'? Matchups 02:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Very good software article and deserves to be a featured list on wikepedia.  Dwilso  02:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Sometimes people mistakes AfD for clean-up. If this article is not good, wikify it. Deletion is a very extreme solution. Zero Kitsune (talk) 03:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong keep This is a very popular, very well deployed networking monitoring package.  It's always good to do research before nominating something for deletion. Celarnor Talk to me  11:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I find this article quite noteable. archanamiya  ·  talk  23:23, 3 April 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.