Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ninja (build system)

Ninja (build system)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deleted PROD. Insufficient coverage from secondary sources to justify notability. None of the sources meets WP:RS and even those sources do not establish notability. Andrew³²⁷ 21:44, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:38, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Ninja is an open source project and as such its project page is a reliable source according to our rules. CMake, one of the big build automation tools, announces its support for Ninja in the other source. And CMake is unquestionable kind of an "established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications". Besides that, there are at least Debian packages in testing and Chromium uses it as its build system for Linux. So it is not someone's hobby project. The one published source I found is from The H which cites mainly the blog post. I agree that we have to extend the article. Give me some weeks and I'll keep doing this. --Grünich (talk) 07:03, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Register had an article about Ninja as well. --Grünich (talk) 16:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The project page is a github account, anybody can get a github account. That does not constitute a reliable source and considering it's github, that would only really fuel an argument for this being a hobby project. My sudoku solver's on github, but I don't think that constitutes creating an Wikipedia article for it. However, The Register article you found is a reliable third-party source. If you can find more like that and include them in the article, you may be able to save it. But, I don't think you're entitled to weeks in order to save it and should act quickly to have the article at least meet minimum notability guidelines. --NINTENDUDE⁶⁴ 21:15, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It seems to be used only for one significant project (the Linux port of Chrome). Might be possible to merge it to Google Chrome but I'm not sure if that's necessary. Very little coverage in reliable sources (the project's own web page is useless for proving notability). --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ninja is used in other Chrome-related projects like node.js, too. And via CMake LyX, Blender, LLVM, and KDE can be built with Ninja. There is even a Ninja plug-in for KDevelop. --Grünich (talk) 05:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 17:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a non-notable tool, and in my opinion it doesn't appear to really even warrant adding it to the Development section of Google Chrome. The tool website is the developer's github account. One of the sources is the developer's own blog talking about the tool, and the H-online source is pretty much a copy/paste job from the blog. So there's a lack of third-party coverage. The only actual independent third-party source here is the CMake website and it's mentioned while describing CMake functionality; that doesn't establish notability. --NINTENDUDE⁶⁴ 21:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]