474:
original aricle. Deep Blue was the first computer that came to mind, unfortunatly I am too young to remember mainstream media from the 70s, so I can't comment if it was popular in that timeframe. However, from reading the article itself and the references that are infact online, I think this computer and the games produced on it would be very informative to someone doing a "history of games" type essay.
246:. The only sources cited so far are by the machine's former users. In order for this article to stay it needs to establish notability by that criterion, not by how well written it is. While I can understand that it could potentially have a claim to notability, there just doesn't seem to be sufficient coverage out there to warrant it.
124:
This was a mainframe computer at the
University of Cambridge from 1971 to 1995. While the university itself and many of its former users are notable, and perhaps some notable projects were developed in whole or in part on it, I am not sure that the same can be said of the computer itself. Certainly a
396:
Although there have been two keep nominations and some attempts to rescue the article, no-one has yet addressed my concerns about this article, namely, the deficiency of reliable sources in third party publications. A computer of this era that can really be considered notable in and of itself should
368:
On the contrary, most notable computers from the era seem to have plenty of online coverage, but oddly enough, this one seems a bit thin on the ground to me. Most of what I can find seems to come from its fans. Still, as you say, there may be plenty of offline references (computer science journals,
202:
I have added a couple of sources, I will admit they are on the border of reliability, but considering the age of the device in question, it is difficult to find a heap of online sources. The computer itself seems notable as games were developed on it and it seems to have spawned a "lively" bulletin
473:
Ok, the internet has been around since the 60s, but the World Wide Web has really only been around since about 1992, and not a lot exists from those early dark days (some say thankfully). I would question the "unanimous" part of the AfD of GROGGS as there was only 2 comments, and we can't see the
422:
Calling it an internet era computer is a bit hard pressed... It was first turned on in 1973. When it was finially switched off for the last time in 1995, it was hardly cutting edge and "notable". It was however, notable way back in the 70s, but of course the internet was not around back then...
445:
Okay, early
Internet era then. (Don't forget that the Internet has been around since the late sixties.) However, there is still a lot of stuff about computer science available online from that era. And here's another question: what exactly was the computer itself notable
492:
Yes, but it is still sufficient coverage in reliable, third party sources that determine whether an article's existence is appropriate. Personally I don't see enough of those, though at a push the article could be redirected or merged into
224:
I was an early user in 1972-3. As I recall, one party trick was writing code to play tunes on the line printer. I was more impressed by the batch scheduler which had been written in-house. Anyway, the article seems good enough now.
298:"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.
454:
and apart from that, all we have is that some games were developed on it. And the comparison with Deep Blue is even more hard pressed -- that made international headlines in the mainstream popular media.
427:
written within the last year that cover the it extensivly, and not just mention it (this is just an example, even if you can find a new article on IBM Deep Blue does not invalidate the above example)
354:
Online sources for something this old will be almost impossible to find. The fact that the BBS started 30 years ago on the
Phoenix is still running seems to be notable to me
117:
327:
494:
397:
have substantial coverage in plenty of third party sources, and I find it very difficult to believe that these would all be offline given that it was an
451:
90:
85:
94:
158:
Actually I have edited anonymously in the past, so I'm not a complete n00b. Please consider this nomination strictly on its merits, viz.,
77:
17:
242:
As I understand it, and this is why I made the nomination in the first place, the criterion for inclusion in
Knowledge is
55:
300:
This article is something different as it's not a case of vanity or PR - it's a small piece of scientific history.
537:
36:
514:
483:
464:
436:
410:
378:
363:
342:
309:
291:
273:
255:
234:
216:
190:
175:
153:
134:
59:
536:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
305:
269:
230:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
81:
510:
460:
406:
374:
287:
279:
251:
171:
130:
301:
265:
226:
207:
so we'll see how we go, but it really needs the attention of an expert from that era with sources.
181:
144:
125:
Google search for "MVS Phoenix" fails to turn up more than trivial coverage in reliable sources.
73:
65:
337:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
479:
432:
359:
212:
278:
By your counter-argument we'd never delete anything :) I'm just going by what I've read in
506:
456:
402:
370:
283:
247:
167:
126:
244:
significant coverage in multiple third party sources that are independent of the subject
450:? The Knowledge article on the bulletin board itself was deleted a while back after a
424:
423:
Trying to find online articles on it would be like trying to find new articles about
204:
334:
159:
111:
203:
board that continues to exist today (30 + years). I have flagged the article for
475:
428:
355:
208:
180:
It's okay, I wasn't accusing you of being a single purpose account or anything.
163:
50:
261:
369:
gaming magazines etc) -- however, we need to see these references.
260:
By that argument, we'd have trouble supporting an article on the
530:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
107:
103:
99:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
143:This is the nominator's first edit to Knowledge.
540:). No further edits should be made to this page.
328:list of Technology-related deletion discussions
8:
505:only links to it without further comment.)
495:University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory
296:The examples given in that guideline are:
326:: This debate has been included in the
7:
24:
280:Knowledge's notability criteria
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
515:12:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
484:11:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
465:11:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
437:10:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
411:10:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
379:19:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
364:12:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
343:09:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
310:12:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
292:09:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
274:08:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
256:07:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
235:07:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
217:02:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
191:02:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
176:01:39, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
154:01:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
135:01:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
60:03:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
557:
503:doesn't mention it at all
533:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
499:but for the fact that
501:that article itself
74:Phoenix (computer)
66:Phoenix (computer)
345:
331:
188:
151:
548:
535:
340:
332:
322:
186:
184:
183:Ten Pound Hammer
149:
147:
146:Ten Pound Hammer
115:
97:
48:(default keep).
34:
556:
555:
551:
550:
549:
547:
546:
545:
544:
538:deletion review
531:
338:
182:
145:
88:
72:
69:
58:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
554:
552:
543:
542:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
487:
486:
468:
467:
440:
439:
414:
413:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
385:
384:
383:
382:
381:
320:
319:
318:
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
302:Colonel Warden
266:Colonel Warden
227:Colonel Warden
219:
197:
196:
195:
194:
193:
187:and his otters
150:and his otters
122:
121:
68:
63:
54:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
553:
541:
539:
534:
528:
527:
516:
512:
508:
504:
500:
496:
491:
490:
489:
488:
485:
481:
477:
472:
471:
470:
469:
466:
462:
458:
453:
452:unanimous AfD
449:
444:
443:
442:
441:
438:
434:
430:
426:
425:IBM Deep Blue
421:
418:
417:
416:
415:
412:
408:
404:
400:
395:
392:
380:
376:
372:
367:
366:
365:
361:
357:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
344:
341:
336:
329:
325:
321:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
294:
293:
289:
285:
281:
277:
276:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
258:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
238:
237:
236:
232:
228:
223:
220:
218:
214:
210:
206:
201:
198:
192:
185:
179:
178:
177:
173:
169:
165:
161:
157:
156:
155:
148:
142:
139:
138:
137:
136:
132:
128:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
532:
529:
502:
498:
447:
419:
399:Internet era
398:
393:
323:
297:
243:
239:
221:
199:
140:
123:
49:
46:No consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
507:Snthdiueoa
457:Snthdiueoa
403:Snthdiueoa
401:computer.
371:Snthdiueoa
284:Snthdiueoa
248:Snthdiueoa
168:Snthdiueoa
127:Snthdiueoa
394:Comment.
262:Internet
240:Comment.
118:View log
56:contribs
420:Comment
335:the wub
166:, etc.
141:Comment
91:protect
86:history
476:Fosnez
429:Fosnez
356:Fosnez
209:Fosnez
205:Rescue
95:delete
160:WP:RS
112:views
104:watch
100:links
51:JERRY
16:<
511:talk
480:talk
461:talk
433:talk
407:talk
375:talk
360:talk
339:"?!"
324:Note
306:talk
288:talk
270:talk
252:talk
231:talk
222:Keep
213:talk
200:Keep
172:talk
164:WP:V
131:talk
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
448:for
333:--
330:.
189:•
152:•
116:– (
513:)
482:)
463:)
435:)
409:)
377:)
362:)
308:)
290:)
282:.
272:)
264:.
254:)
233:)
215:)
174:)
162:,
133:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
509:(
497:(
478:(
459:(
431:(
405:(
373:(
358:(
304:(
286:(
268:(
250:(
229:(
211:(
170:(
129:(
120:)
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.