Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rockbox


 * 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) Foxy Loxy  Pounce! 01:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Rockbox

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

Delete. Hey, this sounds really neat. WP:ILIKEIT even!! Sadly the entire article relies on primary sources (itself) and has yet to receive anything in the way of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party sources (read: NOT BLOGS). JBsupreme (talk) 08:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Blogs aren't defacto unreliable. Blogs maintained by notable experts or organizations are perfectly acceptable and reliable. -

Mgm|(talk) 16:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Ray Beckerman, aka NewYorkCountryLawyer @ slashdot, has been a profound source of information regarding the RIAA's ongoing litigation campaign, for example. Shentino (talk) 17:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why any of this is a problem. The article essentially summarizes the information already freely available by reading Rockbox's SVN logs.  Why is it desirable to have a third party summarize readily available information rather then simply doing it here directly?


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. A google new search shows that it has been featured in PC World, PC Magazine, and Wired several times & has been mentioned in NY Times reviews and in both Popular Science and Nuts & Volts. --Karnesky (talk) 14:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you're finding non-trivial coverage from the sources you've mentioned, please share with the rest of the class so others can make an educated choice. JBsupreme (talk) 16:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep but REWRITE! The topic is easily googled and found, but the article itself needs better references and needs to be less "listy." If these things are cleaned up it might be worth keeping. Timneu22 (talk) 15:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * KEEP


 * I happen to have an mp3 player with said RockBox firmware on it. I was told that it also came preinstalled, which implies OEM support. Shentino (talk) 17:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

The article needs work but the subject is notable to the extent that deletion is not appropriate.--KJRehberg (talk) 18:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP
 * Keep. per the Google News results mentioned above, which you can see here. Right from the top you can see non-trivial coverage of the subject, including several articles devoted entirely to it, in reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:32, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per above. -- MISTER ALCOHOL  TC 04:50, 2 January 2009 (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.