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 No Consensus. CitiCat ^♫ 01:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sum (Unix) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Attempted to prod for notability and WP:NOT#HOWTO. Prod removed citing WP:OTHERSTUFF. WP:OTHERSTUFF being irrelevant to this article, it still fails WP:NOT#HOWTO by being nothing more than an article describing what it is, and how to use it. Spazure 07:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per nom. Looks like a copy of the sum manpage —Travis^talk 19:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral per Unconcerned —Travis^talk 00:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nom Nicko (Talk•Contribs) 05:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and develop as it is clearly marked as a WP:stub. I disagree with user:TravisTX as the page looks nothing like the Sum manpage. If Sum (Unix) goes though, then most pages referenced at GNU Core Utilities must go. May I also suggest that in the future User:Spazure discuss first on the talk page before marking articles for deletion. --Unconcerned 21:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it's not identical, but one can't deny that it appears to be a slimmed-down version of the manpage. Frankly, I have to admit that I didn't even know about the list of GNU Core Utilities -- and would never have thought to look on WP for them -- but now that you point it out, they also seem to violate HOWTO. However, since the list has been around since 2004, I imagine that its merits have already been debated. Thanks for the info. —Travis^talk 00:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That confused me a bit, as well. Apparently the nominator is just an idiot that didn't realize that WP:HOWTO is an archaic guideline, and not a reason to delete something. Luckily, it appears that she has decided to stop nominating things for deletion [1], so we shouldn't have to worry about this anymore. I've also been working to appropriately tag unreferenced and under-referenced windows, linux, and unix commands to help improve those articles so we can avoid dumbasses like her from reading one stinking policy and thinking that her interpretation somehow rules the entire damned site. 24.97.182.82 04:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spazure 08:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - looks like it's copied from a man page and fails to assert notability. :: maelgwntalk 08:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Being one of the GNU Core Utilities is notable enough. —gorgan_almighty 13:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Unconcerned. It needs tidying up to make it more encyclopedic, but deletion is not warranted.—gorgan_almighty 13:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. As with most common Unix commands, there is plenty of discussion of this one. Might be useful to expand coverage to non-GNU versions (e.g. from this source). JulesH 16:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being mostly a self-taught Linux enthusiast I unfortunately lack the kind of Unix expertise required to expand the article. If you could please be WP:Bold and include the mentioned additions, it would be greatly appreciated. --Unconcerned 04:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What he said. I also have some books I can use for some linux references, but not for pure unix (as I've never worked with "real" unix, just suse, slackware, bsd, redhat, and a few other non-notable linux variants. Also links to the prior discussions discounting the howto guideline would help us smack idiots like the nominator down even faster. 24.97.182.82 04:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment see Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(software). Spazure 10:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE TO CLOSING ADMIN nobody other than the nominator feels that wp:howto is relevant, please speedy keep and block the nominator from wasting our time with future nominations for stuff that are so obviously relevant that they don't need a discussion —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.97.182.82 (talk) 18:41, 20 July 2007

WP:HOWTO is relevant to WP, but is not applicable to this article. Dhaluza 20:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:HOWTO is not applicable here. Saying how something is used is not the same as saying how to use something. Dhaluza 20:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I've added a ((tone)) to the article, as fixing the tone is all it requires. —gorgan_almighty 13:18, 24 July 2007 (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.