Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samba TNG


 * 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   no consensus. There was no deletion consensus here, so this defaults to keep. However, a merge outcome has been suggested and I encourage editors to discuss this on the talk page or boldly do the merge. (non-admin closure) NonvocalScream (talk) 20:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Samba TNG

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

weak keep Found on PROD list and felt inappropriate as tag said no releases in three years, release of bug fixes was Jan 2008. Feel AfD more appropriate. Should perhaps be merged with Samba (software). If the concensus is to delete, then I'll merge the article fr33kman (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge with Samba. samj (talk) 07:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  13:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. If I'd have come across this PROD, I would have just removed it.  If I felt like either of you, I'd remove it & slap on merge tags.  Either way, there seems to be no compelling reason to delete this.  --Karnesky (talk) 03:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * comment Agree mostly, I personally hate to remove tags rightout, I prefer to move them to AfD so that at least the person who put it there can have a say. To just remove it seems, to me, to remove democracy. :-) fr33kman (talk) 03:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but contesting by removing & commenting on the PRODers talk page (allowing them to AfD), as suggested by PROD, may also work. I've left the PRODer a note.  As it stands now, we have no comments actually calling for deletion.  --Karnesky (talk) 20:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Pretty much no-brain Merge. Forks aren't automatically notable enough for new articles, but should definitely be covered in the article for the original software. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 13:17, 6 September 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.