Ioquake3 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))

This entry was deleted for being non-notable when it is, in fact, the defacto standard in Quake 3 engine technology on which many projects both commercial and noncommercial free software games are based on it. I created ioquake3 in 2005 and it has continued since then with the help of many contributors. To say that it is irrelevant does the project and those that use it a severe disservice and I think contributes to the overall discouragement of smaller open source and free software projects, as if they and the contributions made to them are without merit. id software created the original code base and released it onto the internet. To say that projects based on the original source release are not notable is like saying that it wouldn't be notable if Ray Bradbury released a book under a creative commons license solely to the net and someone took that and made an entirely new and interesting work of fiction based on it. I have already attempted to contact and discuss this matter with the admin who deleted it, Rjd0060, to no reply. This is the second time that the ioquake3 page has been deleted, both times it seems as if the administrators of wikipedia either do not understand or do not care about open-source software. I find it somewhat discouraging that an mostly internet-published encyclopedia cannot find notable an internet published open source project, or as with the original delete in 2007, it was regarded as an advertisement?! TimeDoctor (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feather Linux (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))

I want to contest the deletion of this page. It is notable enough to have a page. There are sources in books, it has a page at distrowatch and is often mentioned in Linux-related magazines such as [1] Linux Format. I could not find any active policy to weigh the notability of software because the one at Wikipedia:Notability (software) is kept for historical reference only. I left a message on admins talk page two days ago[2], apparently he/she is busy in offline life Magic.Wiki (talk) 06:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Cara (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD)|AfD2)

Maybe I have not jumped to toot my own horn or have management do so, but I've never been one to self promote and maybe my Wiki has been too broad while my significant achievements have been in the guitar business. Still, we have been chosen and featured as one of the top 5 guitar builders in the world by the major guitar publication, and have surpassed some major players. http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2009/Feb/5_Hot_Rodders_You_Should_Meet.aspx I will see to it that insignificant references are quickly deleted. Also GOOGLE and find that there are many people who have created negative press do to us being on wili with such a wide, broad list of achievements. We have many contenders to what we do, and are targets of people who have more success than us, but get less attention. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.250.46 (talk • contribs)

• Please be aware that this is not wiki, it is Wikipedia (does someone have that nice Wikipe-tan image about that?). You are more than welcome to write about Jim Cara on your own website. Endorse deletion as the deletion process was properly followed. Stifle (talk) 10:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse Deletion, no sign of process not being followed, policy and guidelines grossly misinterpreted or of any irregularity. The closure of the first AfD may have been marginal to no-consensus but there is nothing unclear about the consensus in the second one. If the subject of this biography feels notable, my recommendation is either to create a sourced, clear, NPOV article in userspace or articles for creation which demostrates verifiable notability supported by reliable sources. Once that article is complete, any of AfC, RfC or DRV (like, here) can be an appropriate venue to suggest recreation. It may however be a good idea to review Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before writing such an article. Usrnme h8er (talk · contribs) 19:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]