Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ROX Desktop


 * 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. (non-admin closure) 🌀 Locomotive207 - talk  🌀  02:44, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

ROX Desktop

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject of article is a minor hobbyist window manager with no sufficient install base or evidence of any real notability that has been discontinued for ten years. Subject article's sources are not sufficient in order to establish notability according to GNG. Foonblace (talk) 13:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:23, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:38, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep The LinuxUser (via linux-community.de) reference/note looks solid, but the other RS in the article (AcornUser) is only a short news. I also found this article on pro-linux.de, but this may be an user submited content. There may be more on RiscOS related sites/magazines (eg. drobe.co.uk which is offline), so I assume the article subject is notable enough for a stand-alone article (my keep would be strong with more sources). Pavlor (talk) 09:05, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. ROX may be a minority, even moribund, sport these days but it was influential in its day and it was the route by which a number of RISC OS features, such as the taskbar and drag-and-drop app installation, made it to the outside world. We don't use stone axes much either these days, but that is no reason to axe (sic) the article. There is RS out there for ROX, sadly few editors capable of digging it out (cleared out my mags decades ago, darn it). &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 18:08, 27 November 2021 (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.