Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SilentSleeper OS

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 --JForget 23:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SilentSleeper OS

Non-notable desktop OS. No claim of notability. No coverage from reliable sources mentioning it by name in the article. Google doesn't turn up much more. Declined speedy with comment that db-web didn't apply. This is the author's second attempt to create this article. The first was speedied under A7 (here). -- Swerdnaneb 16:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It shows up in both yahoo and google when typing : SilentSleeper OS, and silentsleeper. Some of the other webOS also did not have notability, they're still in wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifeofadaydreamer (talk • contribs) 16:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- I'm afraid that I wasn't as clear as I could have been... I should have said, "Google doesn't turn up much more in the way of reliable sources that are independent of the subject." As far as "some of the other webOS", please see WP:WAX. -- Swerdnaneb 17:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Already deleted as SilentSleeper. Fails WP:N. It appears to be too new to have achieved anything.--Pmedema (talk) 17:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that the SilentSleeper page was deleted already. You can leave that deleted. But i just started this silentsleeper os page yesterday, i would really love it that it stay on wikipedai a bit longert and see how many page views it gets. the desktop web OS is still in beta form. And what harm will this cause Wikipedia if this article was kept on?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifeofadaydreamer (talk • contribs) 19:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- There are a whole mess of arguments to be avoided during deletion discussions. "What about this other..." is one (WP:WAX). "What harm..." is another one(WP:NOHARM). The argument to make is to prove notability. -- Swerdnaneb 19:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete recreation of deleted material RogueNinja_talk 19:31, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. non notable. and how is it an operating system if it requires windows to run? It seems to be just an SWF which contains a calculator.

Also, blatant spam and COI as the sole contributor is Gabriel Lam, Co.Founder of SilentSleeper Co. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.210.172 (talk) 20:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SilentSleeper old webOS(old version from last year) - still in University and still trying to figure out the notability part. It runs on both windows and mac. as i said in the article, it's a web OS to be run on the user's native desktop. it will contain many programs later when it is out of it's beta stage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifeofadaydreamer (talk • contribs) 20:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a flash file that doesn't do anything! My favourite bit is in the site's blog where it says[1]:

"Using flash format to play media files is considered legal"

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.210.172 (talk) 20:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's certainly a format where users can't download or get good quality media out of it. If thats what you mean. And I'm pretty sure I won't end up like TV Links, which you do have an article of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lifeofadaydreamer (talk • contribs) 11 March 2008

Delete. No reliable third-party commentary. Though it's recreation of deleted material, which isn't good, it's not a G4 speedy deletion candidate since this is the first AfD. EdJohnston (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And the recreation of deleted material I believe had nothing much and was deleted before i could even edit it. Some articles in Wikipedia had some serious work done to it while learning the Wikipedia programming language and get deleted way too fast.

You can think of part of the function of the new SilentSleeper OS as TV Links but build with Flash. Is this SilentSleeper OS article that bad?--SilentSleeper Co. (talk) 01:26, 12 March 2008 (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.