Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naim (chat program)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 October 8.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Yarcanox and Dream Focus both correctly point out that this subject has been the subject of coverage in multiple references, although they are only passing mentions. But they point out that improvement might be possible and the delete !votes are not convincing since they do not address those references at all, only the lack of them, which can be addressed through editing rather deletion. As such, consensus is not reached at this point, although Tothwolf's merge proposal might beworth consideration at the appropriate talk pages. So Why 12:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Naim (chat program)

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

This declined CSD is not notable, makes no claim to be notable, and has no references whatsoever. A reference search shows some URLs that mention it exists. Wikipedia is not a software directory. Miami33139 (talk) 15:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with this, if it doesn't say show up, it shouldn't be up on Wiki just because it is FOSS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WngLdr34 (talk • contribs) 15:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. So I guess its not an exact fit for CSD, unfortunately, but it sure as hell isn't notable in any way, shape, or form. JBsupreme (talk) 06:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I used Google's book search to look for "Naim" and "Linux" and found it mentioned in many published works. [1] For the software to be mentioned at all, makes it notable. There are also hundreds of thousands of search results on Google for "Naim" and "chat". A lot of people use this software. Dream Focus 03:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Comparison of instant messaging clients. This client's main name to fame is its ability to work via a text console or remote session while most Multi-IM clients require a GUI. There is nothing in the current article that can't be covered by adding a few footnotes to some of the existing comparison tables. If the subject is later deemed to be notable enough for a standalone article and sufficient sources indicating notability can be located it can be improved and expanded at that time. --Tothwolf (talk) 06:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep "Linux: the complete reference" by Richard Petersen lists XChat, naim and Konversation as IRC client examples (page 304) [2]. Also, "Windows developer power tools" has it as an IRC client listed at page 1206 [3] and fedora manuals for 9,10,11 have it (e.g. for fedora 11 at page 278, although beside Kopete, X-Chat, Konversation and Pidgin [4]). There are more books to be found on google books when searching for "naim IRC". Isn't this enough print coverage? Yarcanox (talk) 16:26, 6 October 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.