Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpadFS

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. Any redirect is a separate editorial decision.  Sandstein  20:30, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SpadFS (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Notability not established. Sources include the inventor's homepage, their doctoral thesis, and a forum; the only additional source I could find is a paper in an off-track conference that has garnered three citations according to GScholar. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 07:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - notability not established. Could not find any reliable source. CerealKillerYum (talk) 08:15, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - As stated above, this just isn't notable. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not notable for stand alone article. Kierzek (talk) 12:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to list of file systems or delete. Sounds kind of interesting, but I can't find much in the way of sources. I did find this article from Linux Magazine, but that's about all that's indexed on Google. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:44, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Modified my vote to suggest redirection rather than deletion, as I didn't realize at the time that we had this list. I think it's better to give readers some idea of where it's used and what supports it. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:48, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for now as I found nothing better than a few links at Books and browser. SwisterTwister talk 05:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Is the concept of crash counting notable? In that case I would vote merge to crash counting. -- intgr [talk] 06:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• @Intgr: as far as I can tell from a quick GScholar search, crash counting was invented by the author of SpadFS, prototyped in that system, and not more notable. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 08:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The Linux Mag source that you added to crash counting could be used to establish some collective notability for SpadFS and crash counting (although I would then redirect crash counting to SpadFS). NinjaRobotPirate rejected that, but probably didn't see the PDF version. CerealKillerYum, CoffeeWithMarkets, Kierzek, did you consider that source? QVVERTYVS (hm?) 08:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I am not impressed, but would agree that if consensus feels that crash counting is notable enough (and it is barely a stub), then this could be merged with it; otherwise, delete. Kierzek (talk) 11:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as it is independently sourced and merge crash counting with it if it's only used in this filesystem. LjL (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:GNG states that "multiple sources are generally expected" — we currently have only one secondary source. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 12:53, 7 October 2015 (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.