Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phantom (operating system)
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. Cirt (talk) 12:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Phantom (operating system) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This article is based exclusively on the information which comes from one source, its author Dmitry Zavalishin. There is no any indication that this OS is really exist, and there is no proof that it will be available in future. It looks like hoax or at least it is impossible to distinguish it from hoax. The same article on the Russian wiki is already proposed for deletion. RedAndr (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 16:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral. There are various articles about it, but they've all come through the one from the Register, which is linked in the article. Whilst I'd say the Register is a good source, it all seems a bit WP:CRYSTAL to me - yet to be released, still in progress. Whilst it may be notable in the future, there's a bit too much speculation here for me to think keep... Greg Tyler (t • c) 17:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Even the source says it's still being created. Too much speculation to have an article at the present time. - Mgm|(talk) 09:12, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Vaporware, so WP:CRYSTAL applies. The Register article is a good start, but until there's actually released software there's very little to talk about. And given the high proportion of OS projects that never actually see a release, now is too early to have this article. JulesH (talk) 20:36, 14 April 2009 (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.