Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JFFS2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. JeremyA 03:41, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Spam. Delete unless rewritten. - Mike Rosoft 11:30, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Rewritten. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment How is this spam? --khaosworks 12:27, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
- How exactly is this not spam, or - more accurately - an advertisement and a promotional? - Mike Rosoft 12:42, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- It seems like a legitimate file system to me, part of the Linux kernel, non-commercial, and appears to be widely used. I think I see what you mean by promotional, but this should be sent to the appropriate Cleanup crew. --khaosworks 13:00, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
- It definitely wasn't a "promotion" (before I rewrote it). It was a copyvio of an information page on the subject written by techies for techies. I write this kind of stuff all the time. The purpose is to get someone else up to speed in a few sentences by giving him the essential information. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:56, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- How exactly is this not spam, or - more accurately - an advertisement and a promotional? - Mike Rosoft 12:42, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Could I ask editors please to use a little more discrimination when deciding whether list articles for deletion. Look in Wikipedia:Deletion policy for a good, clear presentation of when VfD listing is and is not necessary. This article will never be deletable, it's about part of the Linux kernel which is in use in embedded devices, such as JPL's Mars Rover prototypes. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:16, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- KeepVorash 19:53, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- It's copied from http://sources.redhat.com/, as it clearly said at the bottom of the page. Is redhat documentation public domain? RickK 20:19, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. I've rewritten it. I'd like to remind my fellow editors that we all have the capacity to edit, should we choose to exercise it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Why didn't you follow the proper procedure and rewrite it in the /Temp page so that we can get the copyvio out of the history? RickK 20:52, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm a bit of a bugger like that. I fixed it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:28, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. I've rewritten it. I'd like to remind my fellow editors that we all have the capacity to edit, should we choose to exercise it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. There seems to be plenty of information about JFFS that could be incorporated; there are respectable articles on other relatively obscure filesystems (see Comparison of filesystems for links) so there's no reason not to keep this one. Perhaps the article should be moved to JFFS and discuss both 1 and 2, though. -- Wapcaplet 23:50, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand. Some notability. JamesBurns 03:53, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and continue expansion. ElBenevolente 03:58, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and continue to expand. Falphin 17:31, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I guess listing on VfD may not have been an appropriate way to fix this article, but it worked anyway. Keep - and I guess the discussion can be closed now. - Mike Rosoft 18:41, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.