Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roxen (web server)


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 08:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Roxen (web server)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

If I remove the excess puffery, there might not be enough left in this article to even hint at notability; 3rd party sources almost non-existent since creation. Article was PROD'd and restore ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 17:55, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'll agree that the article is in a sorry state and evidently has been for quite a while.  Some old sources do exist, such as this one from Linux Journal or this one from PC Mag. §everal⇒|Times 18:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 18:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per reliable sources about the topic in detail:
 * Leszek, Pawel (March 18, 2002.) "Roxen WebServer 2.2." Linuxjournal.com. Accessed September 2011.
 * Clyman, John (January 15, 2002.) "Roxen WebServer 2.2." PC Magazine. Accessed September 2011.

Northamerica1000 (talk) 14:02, 6 October 2011 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)    03:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - several apparently independent reviews found by googling roxen pike review --Northernhenge (talk) 19:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep an encyclopedia like wikipedia should include all that is out there, this appears to be signifigant. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 19:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article should be rewritten, and i have assembled a list of articles to draw material from on the articles talk page. 46.4.240.197 (talk) 09:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Reliable sources have been found giving coverage of this.  D r e a m Focus  10:37, 15 October 2011 (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.