Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natami
As for sources mentioned above, http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=631463&postcount=56 this post by Dave Haynie ''is'' reliable and may be quoted in the article (just as we do with other experts in their field). http://www.reviewmylife.co.uk/blog/2011/03/23/natami-native-amiga-interview/ This review with one of the developers is also reliable ''for facts about NatAmi''.The issue here isn't that we don't have any |reliable sources for the purposes of |verifiability. The sole issue seems to be that NatAmi has not ''yet'' been covered in Amiga-related ''books'' which are indexed by Google Books (which tends to lead to FUTON bias). That said, given the Amiga community's interest in NatAmi, it certainly deserves ''some form'' of decent coverage here on Wikipedia, be it a standalone article ''or'' merged as part of Amiga#Amiga hardware clones (or elsewhere).The main question which comes to mind for me at least (and should be the question others ask as well), is how would the deletion of verifiable information which is integral to our coverage of Amiga help improve Wikipedia? In this ''specific'' case, I would be tempted to cite our Wikipedia:Ignore all rules|ignore all rules policy in response to the Wikipedia:Notability|notability guideline argument because it is apparent that NatAmi ''is'' important to the coverage of Amiga and ''will'' eventually be covered in published works
— User:Tothwolf, 02:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:V (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)