Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GRUB4DOS

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 merge to GNU_GRUB#Variants. SilkTork *^YES! 21:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GRUB4DOS

No notability indicated, no reliable third party sources. -- Jeandré, 2009-04-30t16:22z 16:22, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

(my 2c, suggest to keep the article GRUB4DOS) My suggestion is to keep the article: reasons are:--

Notability: this seems to be notable as a potentially important extension or adaptation of an important free software GNU GRUB into a new field of application to a widespread operating system.

Reliable third party sources: The external source cited is gna.org, which seems to be independent of the grub4dos authors, and hosting a number of free-software projects. This looks reliable under WP:RS.

Information (Googleability and linkablitiy from other articles) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panarchy (talk • contribs) 11:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terry0051 (talk) 21:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment AFD notice was not placed on article page. Notice added. It also seems that this is a contested prod with the following reason given by contributions: Ridicoulous to delete a factual entry about a FOSS project. Matt (talk) 06:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't see any indication of notability. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete GNA is like sourceforge, anyone can create that. Gigs (talk) 02:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge This could potentially be merged into this section here. Timmie.merc (talk) 07:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.