Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ring (software)

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 Keep. I am very unsure why this has been twice relisted. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ring (software)

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

Non-notable ~~open-course~~ open-source software. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I could not find any reliable secondary sources for this for it to meet WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - perfectly notable open-"course" software (you say that like the fact it's open-source is an argument for deletion). It very recently changed names from "SFLphone" to "Ring", so make sure you search for sources covering it under the old name too. Here's a couple: from Techrepublic by James Sanders and from the German Linux-Magazin by Mathias Huber. LjL (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- First source is good. Second does not mention the product. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:21, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Did you read what I wrote? It mentions "SFLphone", which was the previous name of "Ring" (the article was moved from the former to the latter name). A piece of software that's covered by sources doesn't stop being notable just because its developers change its name. LjL (talk) 01:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. LjL (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep LjL makes some great points, and they have found some solid sources for the software. The rationale for listing this at AfD is a little bit vague, which isn't a problem in and of itself, but in this case, I am just unclear on the specifics about why this user listed it for deletion. Johanna^{(talk to me!)} 16:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Ring is competing FOSS project for VOIP with decentralisation. It is notable for it's long history (it had changed name from SLPhone), also it is the second known project after Linphone, that at last entered Android platform. And it is also notable as GPLv3 licensed software. Sources here https://github.com/savoirfairelinux Toneymoon (talk) 09:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:37, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per WP:GNG. Given the software's former name, I was able to locate plenty of references, and it looks like this article meets the requirements needed to satisfy WP:GNG. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:10, 5 March 2016 (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.