485:
hits. Many of the pages I found are not independent, but either
Wavecom publications, press releases, download sites providing Open AT, an advertisement for a commercial product using Open AT, or other non-independent sources. Some of the pages were not reliable sources (e.g. the Knowledge article on Wavecom, etc). Many of the pages give only passing mention to Open AT. In short, although I found an impressive number of pages mentioning Open AT, I found nothing at all that indicated notability by Knowledge's criteria. The fact that it is "not a consumer OS" is irrelevant for two reasons. Firstly there are thousands of Knowledge articles on topics which are not aimed at consumers or the general public, but which have perfectly good references to more technically-oriented sources: if Open At is notable the same can happen here. Secondly, if there is no significant coverage in reliable independent sources then the topic does not satisfy Knowledge's notability criteria,
226:
is widely used in GPS and Asset
Tracking hardware- as such its a great note on the history and evolution of this OS.. I will work to edit the article because to be honest this is the one place with all that data delivered in such a clean manner- I already pulled the adish wording out, contrary to GregJackP- I still dispute putting something as harsh as the CSD G11 Tag on the article. Just because you dont know what the article is about, and you dont work in embedded electronics- does not mean its not noteworthy. Please see the article discussion page for more info- give this thing a chance, its not that hard to clean up... in fact I think I have already cleaned most of the ad-like stuff, but not being a professional wiki-writer I cannot fully judge the neutrality of the article, I can tell you it does not read like an AD at this point.
544:
notable issue was fixed- I know wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but this is not foretelling anything- the lack of data is because this OS is rare- very few people work with it, but it goes into some rather important products.So you have two choices, be logical and keep the article- or be a lawyer and look for small things you can pick at to remove this article, despite the fact that it covers some rare data that is used by an entire subset of embedded developers. I bet if I knew wiki-law I could make this much more fun, sadly I don't care enough to learn wiki-law or even create a user name and this is the reason why- the developers of this site for the most part seem to revel in squabbles over stupid wiki-law, common sense no more. This is my last post, IP OUT
601:. I'm using it myself right now during a hardware programming course at university and wanted to get some information about it. I know that this is not an argument for keeping an article, it also hardly supports it's notability though. But then again, embedded OSes of this kind are not a very popular theme in the mass media anyway, also keep in mind which links you might break by deleting a two year old article.
484:
Firstly, the answer to "Do you want more links?" is "No thank you. If these are typical of what you can supply then there is no point in giving more". I have checked every one of the links given and, in the cases where the links were to Google searches, I have followed up at least the first page of
351:
is that it is apparently notable, although unreferenced in the
Knowledge article. There are multiple GBook hits that reference THEOS compared to zero for Open AT OS. Similar results when you look at GScholar/GNews hits - a number for THEOS, none for Open AT OS. That is the reason that Open AT OS
225:
One Editor and the above user feel that the article is "spammy", its a very notable OS if your in the very small field of people working with micro-controllers and GSM modems. As I said before this is not MS Windows, your not going to find much on this OS other than the data from the vendor, but it
543:
You know its incredible, we have an OS here that has legitimate industry use and the OS is well documented here- since you all seem to be lawyers looking for a reason to kill this, first it was an AD, then it was not notable, no it does not have enough sources. Oddly the AD issue was fixed and the
538:
Thats fine looks like wikipedia is so bloody bureaucratic now that you have taken what could be the most vast consortium of encyclopedic data and converted it to a litigious stream pointless arguments about why you should delete data, after looking at some of the other articles its clear wikipedia
493:
guideline says that a topic should have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and does not go on to say "unless it has not received such coverage because it is an obscure technical topic that most people aren't expected to want to read about".
206:
listed, all appear to be self-published. GNews shows what appear to be press releases, but no other coverage. IP contesting CSD stated on talk page that there are few to no sources for the software, and that it needs to be here to get the information out.
257:: Please do not rearrange people's comments. There is no need to separate arguments whereby "Keep" goes in one sectionm and "delete" in another, and choices other than keep or delete do not go in a category called "Does not want..."
539:
has no set standard, or that the standard is always changing- I have even found groups that pride themselves on deleting data, sure there is a lot of spam, but I have found a number of great articles deleted by groups like
163:
446:
There are industry hits- they may not be impressive or in english but they are there- and thats without digging, thats just properly structuring a boolean query on google. -yes I know the "AND" is implied.
521:
No independent sources cited in the article, and, despite efforts shown above, no evidence of significant coverage in reliable independent sources shown here either, nor found by my searches.
449:
Like I said this is not a desktop OS hence very few articles will exist on it, what do you want- and O'Rilly's book on it? Because that will never happen this is not a consumer OS.
428:
118:
391:
157:
344:
indicated that the article had problems from being spammy, and a third (an IP - 76.117.247.55) stated it was an ad - three separate evaluations of the same problem.
316:
352:
is up for deletion, and THEOS is not - even if it were relevant to this discussion, which it is not. The article was nominated for deletion because I can find no
578:
gets a page here. So, if anyone wants to know more about this OS, they'll have to deal with the proprietary manuals, and little blurb in the company's article,
51:. Favoring merge and redirect over delete since this seems like a potential search term. No prejudice to splitting it off again later if sources are found.
409:
397:
429:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Open+AT%22+AND+%22wavecom%22+%22product+review%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
277:
Sorry
Mandsford was unsure of how to format this so its easily readable, its not like the UI is great for new users- thanks for the cleanup.
123:
548:
465:
278:
237:
392:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Open+AT%22+AND+%22wavecom%22&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=200000000001&as_sdtp=on
17:
194:
Contested CSD-G11. Two editor and IP commented that it appeared to be "spammy" or an ad in edit summaries or talk page. Not
91:
86:
403:
95:
234:
VERY few sources document this OS, but it is notable and important- at least for a guy like me who reads these articles.
178:
586:
410:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Open+AT%22+AND+%22wavecom%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
385:
360:
that support its inclusion in
Knowledge. Without such references, it does not merit an entry and should be deleted. (
145:
398:
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22open+at%22+AND+%22wavecom%22
78:
652:
36:
651:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
469:
583:
552:
282:
241:
139:
526:
499:
135:
637:
616:
591:
530:
503:
473:
369:
331:
300:
286:
266:
245:
216:
60:
490:
365:
296:
262:
212:
171:
185:
327:
608:
522:
495:
424:
56:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
633:
612:
415:
82:
540:
151:
404:
http://www.google.com/patents?q=%22Open+AT%22+AND+%22wavecom%22&btnG=Search+Patents
361:
292:
258:
208:
386:
http://books.google.com/books?q=%22Open+AT%22+AND+%22wavecom%22&btnG=Search+Books
323:
575:
357:
203:
195:
52:
112:
629:
571:
353:
199:
74:
66:
341:
625:
579:
47:
566:
meant to be the sum of all human knowledge, not even the sum of all
291:
You're welcome-- things like this have happened to me before too.
348:
645:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
421:
a paper someone wrote on fleet tracking that mentions open AT
628:; does not appear to be notable enough for its own article.
425:
http://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:23315/FULLTEXT01
230:
Also take a look at some of the other Real Time OS'es see-
340:- to clarify some misinformation, two editors (myself and
381:
Hmm, thats not what I got, here is a quick sample query-
541:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Deletionist_Wikipedians
416:
http://www.gsmfavorites.com/gsmhardware/1wavecomm1306b/
108:
104:
100:
170:
476:(The same user as the 64.207 IP for those wondering)
231:
487:
no matter what the reason for that lack of coverage
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
655:). No further edits should be made to this page.
562:. Contrary to the press releases, Knowledge is
607:about this article and maybe rewrite that. --
317:list of Software-related deletion discussions
184:
8:
311:
570:knowledge. Only that knowledge that has
315:: This debate has been included in the
603:Please point out what exactly you find
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
582:. That's the way things are.
232:http://en.wikipedia.org/THEOS
672:
592:14:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
531:10:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
504:10:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
474:01:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
370:22:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
332:19:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
301:18:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
287:18:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
267:18:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
246:21:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
217:18:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
648:Please do not modify it.
402:google patent (why not)
32:Please do not modify it.
638:09:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
617:22:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
452:Do you want more links?
61:19:00, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
408:google (also why not)
572:independent coverage
347:The difference with
44:The result was
589:
334:
320:
663:
650:
587:
576:reliable sources
358:reliable sources
321:
204:reliable sources
189:
188:
174:
126:
116:
98:
34:
671:
670:
666:
665:
664:
662:
661:
660:
659:
653:deletion review
646:
414:a project page
390:google scholar
131:
122:
89:
73:
70:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
669:
667:
658:
657:
641:
640:
619:
602:
595:
594:
546:
545:
533:
515:
514:
513:
512:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
450:
447:
439:
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
418:
412:
406:
400:
394:
388:
374:
373:
345:
335:
308:
307:
306:
305:
304:
303:
289:
270:
269:
250:
228:
227:
192:
191:
128:
124:AfD statistics
69:
64:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
668:
656:
654:
649:
643:
642:
639:
635:
631:
627:
623:
620:
618:
614:
610:
606:
600:
597:
596:
593:
590:
585:
581:
577:
573:
569:
565:
561:
558:
557:
556:
554:
550:
549:64.207.236.42
542:
537:
534:
532:
528:
524:
520:
517:
516:
505:
501:
497:
492:
488:
483:
480:
479:
478:
477:
475:
471:
467:
466:72.192.83.115
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
451:
448:
445:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
430:
426:
422:
419:
417:
413:
411:
407:
405:
401:
399:
395:
393:
389:
387:
384:google books
383:
382:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
350:
346:
343:
339:
336:
333:
329:
325:
318:
314:
310:
309:
302:
298:
294:
290:
288:
284:
280:
279:64.207.236.42
276:
275:
274:
273:
272:
271:
268:
264:
260:
256:
253:
252:
251:
248:
247:
243:
239:
238:64.207.236.42
235:
233:
224:
221:
220:
219:
218:
214:
210:
205:
201:
198:software, no
197:
187:
183:
180:
177:
173:
169:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
137:
134:
133:Find sources:
129:
125:
120:
114:
110:
106:
102:
97:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:
68:
65:
63:
62:
58:
54:
50:
49:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
647:
644:
621:
604:
598:
567:
563:
559:
547:
535:
523:JamesBWatson
518:
496:JamesBWatson
486:
481:
420:
396:google news
337:
312:
254:
249:
236:
229:
222:
193:
181:
175:
167:
160:
154:
148:
142:
132:
45:
43:
31:
28:
423:via google
158:free images
491:notability
354:verifiable
200:verifiable
75:Open AT OS
67:Open AT OS
362:GregJackP
293:Mandsford
259:Mandsford
209:GregJackP
46:merge to
427:( QUERY
324:Darkwind
119:View log
626:Wavecom
580:Wavecom
536:Comment
338:Comment
255:Comment
196:notable
164:WP refs
152:scholar
92:protect
87:history
53:Shimeru
48:Wavecom
630:Stifle
605:spammy
568:useful
560:Delete
519:Delete
489:. The
136:Google
96:delete
622:Merge
609:Mewtu
482:Reply
349:THEOS
322:-- --
179:JSTOR
140:books
113:views
105:watch
101:links
16:<
634:talk
613:talk
599:Keep
588:ping
584:Pcap
553:talk
527:talk
500:talk
470:talk
366:talk
328:talk
313:Note
297:talk
283:talk
263:talk
242:talk
223:Keep
213:talk
172:FENS
146:news
109:logs
83:talk
79:edit
57:talk
624:to
574:in
564:not
342:JzG
202:or
186:TWL
121:•
117:– (
636:)
615:)
555:)
529:)
502:)
472:)
368:)
356:,
330:)
319:.
299:)
285:)
265:)
244:)
215:)
166:)
111:|
107:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
85:|
81:|
59:)
632:(
611:(
551:(
525:(
498:(
468:(
431:)
372:)
364:(
326:(
295:(
281:(
261:(
240:(
211:(
190:)
182:·
176:·
168:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
143:·
138:(
130:(
127:)
115:)
77:(
55:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.