Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xdelta

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, due to the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. Davewild (talk) 18:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion was declined for this article, so let's discuss it. It is my view that this article does not meet the basic criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia. xdelta, while a wonderful implementation of the rsync algorithm, has never seen wide use -- at least not the sort which merits maintaining an article on it. It is omitted from most major Linux distributions despite being licensed under the GNU General Public License. This article has generated very little content since started many years ago, and its only sources are from the software's own Web site and its GoogleCode project page. Few Google results tell anything about the software in question and instead simply state its existence and link back to the software's Web site. If this software is really popular enough to merit maintaining an encyclopedia entry on it, then someone should provide real references from publications beyond one section of a person's PhD thesis which goes uncited in the article. The muramasa (talk) 14:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I declined the speedy because it's been a FreeBSD port for years. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does everything in the FreeBSD ports collection have an article, or more importantly, should it? The muramasa (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep or possibly partially merge or redirect to rsync or diff. xdelta is included in Debian, at least, and crops up in weird places, but I agree it's a less known tool. I believe it warrants some sort of mention somewhere, however. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 19:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lacks notability and reliable sources. Significant coverage in independent reliable sources is required for notability. swaq 17:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Swaq; WP:ILIKEIT is not a valid argument. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - lack of media coverage. PhilKnight (talk) 13:53, 25 June 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.