Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Openserving


 * 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. Nakon 04:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Openserving

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:WEB. Dead project, no customers, website no longer exists, references are all to press-release announcements of the project; no substantive discussion of the project is referenced. Therefore, no longer notable, if it ever was. Argyriou (talk) 00:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge into parent organization Wikia. -- SEWilco (talk) 01:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * First of all, I'd like to point out that the current status of the project is irrelevant to a discussion as to if something is notable. There are many notable failed projects with articles. Secondly, there are no press-releases referenced in the article.  There are, however, three reliable sources. USAToday, DailyTimes.com.pk and Journalism.co.uk - three separate newspapers.  I say it meets our requirements... if only barely. I wouldn't be oposed to a merge if thats what we wanna do. The content should really be kept somewhere. ---J.S  (T/C/WRE) 01:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * All three of the references you cite (which are the three from the article) are essentially re-written press releases, with a couple of words from Jimbo or others where they spout a couple more buzzwords. But it's just announcements. Openserving isn't even a notable failure. That said, if someone wants to add a sentence or two to Wikia about this particular bit of vaporware, I don't see much problem with that. Argyriou (talk) 17:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge/Keep Would be nice if the information is kept somewhere. --till (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC) 
 * Delete. Article doesn't assert notability and refs are press releases which are not generally regarded as reliable sources. If reliable independent sources can be found then keep. A redirect or merge is also possible.  SilkTork  *What's YOUR point? 18:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,


 * delete Press releases do not reliable sources make. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

* keep; however,.... A year ago I'd created a redirect: < http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=openserving&diff=162358044&oldid=97903672 >.

If deletion is chosen, then, please do revert.

Thank You,

&#91;&#91; hopiakuta Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message. %7e%7e  Thank You. -]] 23:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you please sign your message using four tildes? Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 19:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.   -- --  pb30 < talk > 18:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. D.M.N. (talk) 19:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. For some reason, this project seems to have disappreared. The cited references appear very dated and there is no 'former glory' of the kind that might justify an historical article. If the project comes back to life, this article can be recreated. EdJohnston (talk) 04:00, 23 January 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.