Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xfce


 * 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   '''speedy keep per withdrawal. I'm surprised this was nominated, tbh; it is the most popular Linux desktop environment behind GNOME and KDE.'''. (non-admin closure) Sceptre (talk) 13:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Xfce

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

Not notable, doesn't claim to be notable, all sources listed are passing mentions, self-published, or blogs. Contested PRODMiami33139 (talk) 00:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC) '''Withdrawn considering LinuxMag source by Reisio and Linux Journal source by OlivierDST. I hope those sources make it into the article so the next person on cleanup patrol doesn't re-nominate the article. What is currently there is not enough.''' Miami33139 (talk) 21:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - The "Prevalance" section shows it's notable enough.. if it can be the default desktop on all those Linux distributions then it would be very notable for Linux users. But how notable are they? :) -- OlEnglish (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Being potentially used in handfuls of also unused custom Linux distros is not notable. In fact, there are several distros in that list that should not have Wikipedia articles.  Please show multiple mainstream reliable sources that indicate notability of this software. Miami33139 (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Xfce vs three recently featured article names. This message brought to you by someone using Xfce. ¦ Reisio (talk) 02:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * One of which (from LinuxMag) is a good source showing notability. The other two are blurbs. Show me another good source, add them to the article, and the argument about notability and the AfD are withdrawn! Miami33139 (talk) 04:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It'll be less work to just let this nomination fail naturally. (or: why couldn't you just find more sources yourself, instead of drive-by-AfDing all these articles?) ¦ Reisio (talk) 12:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Seeing yet another article about XFCE I first turned to wikipedia to learn about it. Very surprised to see that that the article is a candidate for deletion Tim Richardson (talk) 04:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I have another source in which Xfce is mentioned. The print magazine Linux Journal, March 2009 issue (Issue 179).  Front cover mention.  Link to online issue  information: http://www.linuxjournal.com/issue/179  --Oliviervdst (talk) 12:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC) — Oliviervdst (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep and close this discussion now. Deletion nomination is absurd. --Thv (talk) 15:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Xfce is most likely the third most used desktop environment for linux/unix, one of the three Ubuntu desktops etc. pipatron (talk) 15:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Xfce is widespread software. I have to wonder at original poster's motive here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.244.190 (talk) 15:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Type Xfce into google and take a look at the abundance of independant sites that discuss Xfce. Even wikipedia has several pages that clearly describe Xfce's notabiltity (such as Xubuntu). Please do not delete a valuable page simply because it needs to be expanded. Thanks! -Gr0ff (talk) 18:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.   —Gr0ff (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   —Gr0ff (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.   —Gr0ff (talk) 18:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, as there are no calls for deletion & the nominator has retracted the original call. --Karnesky (talk) 00:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Add References to Article' Miami33139 (talk) 00:48, 13 February 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.