Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XFree86


 * 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. WP:SNOW Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  08:04, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

XFree86

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The sources in this article and the sources in X Window System are insufficient to demonstrate notability. w umbolo  ^^^  10:38, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Other than the RS (or probable RS) mentioned in the article (Linux Magazine, The Register) there many more: InfoWorld (20 March 2000, p. 52; half page article), PC Magazine (August 1997, pp. 311-312), more than 30 pages in a book "Inside Linux" (pp. 93-130). Pavlor (talk) 08:49, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The RS mentioned in the article are very minor mentions. The InfoWorld article was written by a non-journalist with a history of writing fraudulent articles . The PC magazine article is about the X Window System on Linux, and the only reason it is about XFree86 is because that was the current version at the time. That does not indicate any long-term significance of this particular version. w umbolo   ^^^  10:22, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Discussed by multiple reliable sources, for example and . SJK (talk) 10:54, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per others. Suspect WP:BEFORE was not given due diligence.  Why is this at AfD? Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:00, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that you didn't read WP:BEFORE since you want to keep this article per circumstantial minor mentions, unreliable sources, passing mentions, and manuals which only mention the software in context of hardware requirements for other software. w umbolo   ^^^  14:14, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Now German language sources. Solid article about licence problems (online version of the May 2004 issue of the German Linux Magazin): ; another German article about the state of the project in 2011: (note although pro-linux.de claims to have staff and editorial oversight, it may be close to one man project, so probably weaker for notability purposes); there are also several short news on heise.de. Pavlor (talk) 15:00, 13 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. Disruptive nomination. Nominator obviously hasnt used Linux or BSD back in the late 1990s early 2000s when it was included in almost every distribution. 2A01:4C8:B:7127:F201:A496:C036:897C (talk) 15:04, 13 September 2018 (UTC) Strike long-term abuser. w umbolo   ^^^  19:11, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep. Extremely notable X Windows implementation was the main one for a while. PaleAqua  (talk) 18:57, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Example of sources directly or indirectly talking about XFree86 that I found just with quick searching:    PaleAqua  (talk) 23:24, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep I told you to stop with these ridiculous nominations. This is getting out of hand now. Govvy (talk) 22:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * WTF Keep Why was this even nommed? Hell, I've used familiarity with X.Org Server as a litmus test to know if the "IT guy" I was dealing with was worth his paycheck before. And it's served me well in that capacity. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  23:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep – this was an essential part of the Linux world for years. There are multiple books written about this, as well as countless magazines and online sources. Brad  v  23:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep there are entire books on this software .  The claim that they only discuss the topic because it was the current version of the X Window Server may be accurate, but that's not a reason to delete. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 23:20, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG with sources mentioned by, , , and . —  Newslinger  talk   01:42, 14 September 2018 (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.