Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SYS 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 delete. Consensus is that it doesn't meet the notability guidelines at this time.--

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

Non-notable Linux distro. Was tagged

• Delete - No independent reviews. People should keep in mind that this is different to SYSLINUX, which has something to do with a floppy disk linux image. Does not seem to exist outside the references included in the article, and Google has no external incoming links to the reference site. A google for '"Werner Landgraf" "SYS Linux" gets suspiciously few hits. -- Mark Chovain 09:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As above. Reading the very last paragraph in the article, I guess the author mis-understood the purpose of Wikipedia somewhat, it's specifically
  not trying to be a directory on all possible Linux distributions. --Minimaki (talk) 12:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 12:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I would love to say keep in this article if there are
  reliable secondary sources that this article is important. By reading the distro is distributed by hand, put the download link, the 0.20 version was released 3 days ago!, etc., makes me feel that the subject is not yet ready to have a wikipedia article. Dekisugi (talk) 12:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete I just don't see notability demonstrated here due to lack of reliable sources.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Life is not fair, and if
  secondary sources do not exist, neither is Wikipedia. --Dhartung | Talk 20:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. Wikipedia is
  frowned upon. —Snthdiueoa (talk|contribs) 21:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete not for lack of effort, but a lack of reliabe sources about this distribution TRAVELLINGCARIMy story_{Tell me yours} 04:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Does not make the cut for notability per lack of third party comment and refs. Halfmast (talk) 06:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• keep W.landgraf: The text of your article has been modified and included in the docdroppers article on Lesser known Linux Distros due to the significance of a fully automated install process. Best of luck keeping it on wikipedia :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miserablyeverafter (talk • contribs) 07:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)— Miserablyeverafter (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete. Isn't "your own software project" on the list of
  bad article ideas? Guy (Help!) 09:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete. Only one man presenting his hobby, seemingly derived from earlier work of others. More an ego trip than an linux distro.
• Delete. No reliable sources presented. --Fredrick day 14:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ich weiß nicht, ob Sie es schon bemerkt haben, aber Sie haben eine eigene Diskussionsseite, und einige Leute haben schon versucht, Sie dort zu kontaktieren.

I don't know if you have noticed already, but you have your own talk page, and some people have already tried to contact you there.

(This does not belong here, but please leave this message here for a while to make this user aware that he has a talk page.) --Hans Adler (talk) 14:56, 20 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.