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. The notability is not an issue according to the comments and refs at the moment, the article needs improvement and not deletion. Tone 14:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David S. Miller[edit]

David S. Miller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can find no evidence of this individual meet the bar of WP:Notability FellGleaming (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— 88.72.228.171 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

— Cdamian (talk • contribs) has made few or no other recent edits outside this topic.

— 69.47.21.48 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

— 71.102.225.71 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

— MarceloMagallon (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

— 188.24.86.218 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Sigh, I see this deletion request must have found its way to some Linux message board somewhere. Fell Gleaming(talk) 17:14, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It did not. Did you see WHO posted a message after mine? If you don't, then you probably aren't even qualified to put up this AfD. User:Joy tried to gently warn you up front, but you ignored it. This AfD was a serious mistake, and should be closed NOW to avoid further embarrassing people. Achitnis (talk) 18:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He is somewhat true, as Harald Welte - another notable developer - has mentioned this case in his blog. However, this is totally irrelevant. The simple truth is that FellGleaming failed to do his homework before proposing to delete the article. While this is a shame, it can happen. But failing to admit the mistake and instead trying to distract by making such claims with the implication that the "keep"-voices are all shills is outrageous and makes the mistake worse. -- Kju (talk) 19:30, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Harald Welte - another notable developer - has mentioned this case in his blog." Thank you Kju; I knew something similar had to have happened. The simple fact is that, if you define any subject narrowly enough, a person is notable. In the field of software, this person does not quality. In the field of software development, he does not quality. In the field of Linux kernel developers, he may well be notable, but such narrow definitions are rarely helpful. I'm sure the model airplane builders of America have a list of people they consider notable as well. Wikipedia is not a page for Vanity Pages. Is a biography about this person of any possible interest to someone who doesn't already know who he is? That is the unanswered question here. Fell Gleaming(talk) 19:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the field of software, this person does not quality. In the field of software development, he does not quality. In the field of Linux kernel developers, he may well be notable, but such narrow definitions are rarely helpful. What makes you think that he does noy qualify in the field of software development? Do you have any evidence of that? Citing the [Wikipedia:BIO] guidelines ..., engineers, and other creative professionals: The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work. Now ask yourself is Linux a significant or well-known work? No doubt. Did David Miller play a major role in co-creating it? I have no doubt about that: The Linux kernel network stack is one of its major components. Linux would be insignificant if it wouldn't have such a network stack. In fact, a lot of the early (and still today) sucess of Linux is due to its extensive networking features. Porting Linux to the SPARC and UltraSPARC CPU architecture is also a major role in creating Linux as it exists today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HaraldWelte (talk • contribs) 20:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

— 90.189.251.112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

— 76.228.85.230 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note: To those who are making arguments in favor of this entry, it would be very helpful if you would incorporate your specialized knowledge on notability into the article. Well-sourced, valid claims within the entry itself will certainly silence any objections. Thanks Fell Gleaming(talk) 03:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Let's not waste any more time on this badly researched AfD that will, without any doubt, fail. Let's go spend our efforts beefing up the actual article so that it in itself becomes the primary shield against deletionists. Which would, of course, make it self referential in a way, which brings up a few questions of its own, but never mind :) Achitnis (talk) 04:45, 18 April 2010 (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.
More