Difference between revisions of "Talk:Obsidian (source port)"

From DoomWiki.org

(Deletion)
m (Deletion)
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
: I agree with the decision. There are equally minor ports already documented, with one release ever. A particularly significant one you'd see no argument from anybody about happens to be [[MBF]]. I pity da foo who would try to delete that article ;) --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] 17:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 
: I agree with the decision. There are equally minor ports already documented, with one release ever. A particularly significant one you'd see no argument from anybody about happens to be [[MBF]]. I pity da foo who would try to delete that article ;) --[[User:Quasar|Quasar]] 17:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 +
::I have a personal fondness for [[Fusion]]. --[[User:Gez|Gez]] 10:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:26, 19 August 2013

Deletion

Delete, dead source port with zero releases. GhostlyDeath 07:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Keep; what's this then?  Development was no doubt discontinued, but we've always said that any port or utility with a release, stable or not, gets an article because there are so few and no one else is ever going to document them.    Ryan W 04:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmm.  I'm going to de-tag this based on the above.  There is the view that only projects meeting some standard of prominence should be documented, but coding and releasing a usable program is probably significant in itself — we've only been more restrictive with events that come and go easily (e.g. clans, STO accounts, WAD teams whose first two actions are registering a domain name and choosing a soundtrack).    Ryan W 15:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the decision. There are equally minor ports already documented, with one release ever. A particularly significant one you'd see no argument from anybody about happens to be MBF. I pity da foo who would try to delete that article ;) --Quasar 17:09, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
I have a personal fondness for Fusion. --Gez 10:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)