Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funtoo Linux

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 redirect to Gentoo Linux. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Funtoo Linux

Funtoo Linux (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article lacks any third-party reliable sources; fails WP:GNG. Aoidh (talk) 01:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

• Redirect or maybe merge to Gentoo Linux. I'm actually a little surprised that there's so little coverage of it in reliable sources. I haven't edited Linux-related articles in a while now, so maybe I'm a bit out of practice in finding sources, but the best I could find were trivial mentions like Introducing Linux Distros (published by Apress). If someone else can find better sources, go ahead and ping me. But unless that happens, I think the best course of action is to redirect to Gentoo. We could probably find a bit of sourced commentary somewhere to briefly explain the drama. If not, well, it's already mentioned in Gentoo Linux#Popularity as a spinoff. So, it won't be a completely unexpected redirect that will confuse readers. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:59, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 16:19, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. —UY Scuti ^Talk 16:20, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. —UY Scuti ^Talk 16:20, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:10, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

• Redirect per above, deletion would bring no benefits for readers looking for the topic. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:44, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:44, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

---

• Redirect is a terrible idea from a technical standpoint. If you redirect Funtoo to Gentoo you will effectively delete a lot of information that an average user needs: Funtoo has a different homepage, GitHub page, IRC channel, forums, subreddit, and the Funtoo Compute Initiative that Gentoo lacks. While Funtoo might lack verifiable third-party sources, the main authority on the technical points is the distribution itself: Both Sabayon and Gentoo heavily rely on their own websites to provide that kind of information. And this is the main sticking point: Gentoo is not an authority on what constitutes Funtoo. Funtoo supports a different set of platforms than Gentoo, and a different set of kernels compared to Gentoo.Funtoo does not support systemd. Redirecting to Gentoo will add the weight of authority onto Gentoo: If you plan to redirect to Gentoo, where do you plan to add all the information Funtoo is an authority on?

  From an editorial standpoint, managing such an arrangement is a lot more complicated. While Gentoo is Unix-like, Funtoo is Linux only: there's no FreeBSD kernel included with Funtoo, and there is no guide on how to create a FreeBSD environment on Funtoo, in contrast to Gentoo. All the issues that need to be resolved to make such an arrangement work are not worth the time and effort. And what happens when Funtoo and Gentoo start to differ even more? We will be forced to unmerge the articles again. Redirecting Funtoo to Gentoo will only create more confusion on what is different between the two.

  I am willing to fix the article to the best of my abilities. The article needs almost a complete rewrite, and it lacks a lot of information about Funtoo. I am going to start working on it now, and I encourage reviews of any of the proposed changes, and I will share my reasoning on the talk page for the changes.

  Bias warning: I currently use Funtoo Linux, but I am not a fanboy of any distribution. I use a variety of distributions in server and desktop environments. I have a vested interest in having accurate and reliable information on the strong and weak points of every distribution, rather than making any distribution look good.

References

Brhenc (talk) 11:48, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

---

None of these references are reliable sources, none of them push the article towards meeting WP:GNG in any way. The issue isn't how the article is written, it's that the subject of the article itself is not notable. That's not something even rewriting from scratch would solve. - Aoidh (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

• Redirect as proposed. I'd do it myself, but wanted there to be a response to the text above. In the absence of significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources (?) related to the subject, there is no basis for us to write a detailed article on the subject without delving into primary source original research. If there is something sourced to say about Funtoo, say it in its parent article and split it out summary style only when the sources warrant it.  czar 05:19, 19 December 2016 (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.