Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House (operating system)

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

House (operating system)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG. Not a single WP:RS found even for a redirect Clenpr (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:16, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:44, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No non-primary sources found. Likely to cause confusion if redirected due to existence of various "smart home" operating system so deletion seems better than a redirect. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 22:42, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No notability. Not SIGCOV. Doesn't meet WPWGNG. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 19:20, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment / question - multiple papers on this OS presented at conferences they're by parties associated with its development. I've added them to the article. Can someone tell me if conference papers peer-reviewed? If so, I'm inclined to keep. If not, I'm inclined to delete. One of the papers is cited 51 times; I only looked at a sample but I saw passing mentions typically of a paragraph. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @A. B.: If they are leading academics in that subject (easy to verify by published work, monographs for example ) or known as established leaders (easy to verify by prior publishing history) in that subject meeting in conference, then any papers they produce will be WP:SECONDARY coverage. However, lots of folk go to conferences and produce papers that are rank and are generally primary and/or useless. A citation count of 51 is far too low in any instance to count. Passing mentions are just that. They don't count for anything. There is no depth to them. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 14:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Haskell#Notable_applications as preferred WP:ATD. ~Kvng (talk) 16:39, 15 May 2025 (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.