Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syllable Desktop (2nd nomination) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Syllable_Desktop_(2nd_nomination)

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 keep. ✗plicit 23:51, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syllable Desktop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This was previously listed for deletion due to lack of general notability in December 2020, however this was closed due to lack of consensus and instead a banner put on the article asking for further sources to establish notability. However this has not happened, no further sources have been forthcoming (including those promised in the AfD debate) and now even this project's official website has shut down.

I would like to reiterate my original points from that AfD since no further sources have been forthcoming to contradict it - the subject is a long-defunct minor hobbyist OS of no particular import and with no particularly large user base, if it even has one or has ever had one. It is simply not notable in any clear way. Foonblace (talk) 13:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:39, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I listed and commented available sources in the last AfD (I may list them again, if there is a request to do so) and my stance is the very same as back then: Somewhat weak keep as there are some sources with broad enough coverage of the article subject but their reliability or independence may be questionable. Still enough - in my POV - sources to establish notability. Pavlor (talk) 07:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think if there are sufficient sources available to evidence notability then these should be included in the article, but they have not been. Foonblace (talk) 17:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• To comment above, the sources do not magically disappear if they haven't been added since the last AfD. I would imagine a WP:BEFORE includes reading any relevant discussions pertaining to the article including any previous AfD discussions. The onus is on the nominator as the material can still be used to improve the article. – The Grid (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. – The Grid (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. – The Grid (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I added four sources I mentioned during the last AfD to the "Further reading" section of the article. First two (root.cz and pro-linux.de) are available online, so anyone can judge for themselves; the other two (Linux Format) are offline/behind paywall (note one of these is not entirely independent on the article subject). I will try to improve the article using these sources, but my computer time is too short these days. Pavlor (talk) 08:42, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Ghettoblaster (talk) 22:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:19, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:WHYN, the existence of reliable sources is enough; they do not have to be included on the actual page. This review and this article were noted in the previous AfD discussion and pass WP:SIGCOV with this and the other sources already referenced on the page. Heartmusic678 (talk) 16:38, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep sources establish notability. NemesisAT (talk) 11:37, 23 November 2021 (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.