Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psiphon


 * 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 of the debate was keep. WP:NOT a crystal ball, but verifiable cases of other people crystal ball-gazing (e.g. the press) is usually enough, as we can see here using primitive vote-counting techniques. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 12:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Psiphon
Wikiepdia is not a crystal ball. Bobby1011 05:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. -- Zsinj Talk 05:28, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Anticipated software is verifiable, notable, timely, and of wide interest. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 05:32, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Wikipedia $$\ne$$ crystal ball.   dbtfz talk 05:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)  Change to keep in light of press coverage.   dbtfz talk 16:20, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. The project is legitimate and has a firm announcment date.  The article will serve to provide useful information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyle r b (talk • contribs)
 * Keep: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball has been applied leniently across the board especially with movies and other products with an announced release date. Notability would be another issue, but that doesn't seem to be the objection here and I don't know enough to comment on that. savidan(talk) (e@) 06:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If anyone can point to an actual press release (or something like that) announcing when the software is to be released, I'll reconsider.  dbtfz talk 07:07, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It was announced in The Globe and Mail article (posted 9:10 AM EST ON 13/02/06) linked in the article: . See the 14th paragraph. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 08:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It's true that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but as the text of that prohibition indicates, "It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, provided that discussion is properly referenced." It is exactly that discussion of what the impact will be if Psiphon fulfills its intent which has led to Psiphon being covered by several major news sources even at this early stage of its development.  Keep. -- Antaeus Feldspar 15:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above reasons. It seems like it could be politically important, too, which just adds to its notability.  Snurks T C 19:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Ardenn 17:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, I agree with Antaeus Feldspar and Snurks. I read about Psiphon in an article in Le Monde (, in French), and I thought to read some more about it on Wikipedia - I suppose more people will have that idea, so having an article makes sense... (and I forgot to sign, I see) Semprini 17:41, 18 February 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.