Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenda, the Plan 9 Bunny

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 merge to Plan 9 from Bell Labs. czar ⨹ 13:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Glenda, the Plan 9 Bunny

Glenda, the Plan 9 Bunny (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Subject lacks independent notability. It is the topic of blogs, people's homepages, a Facebook page, but no serious art critics or computing publications have, as far as I could establish, discussed the Plan 9 bunny in depth.

I previously redirected to Plan 9 from Bell Labs, which was reverted by Andy Dingley, who reasoned that "Tux has no more independent notability than Glenda". I don't think Tux has ever been up for deletion, which would make it a precedent. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:59, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• keep Notability is not temporary. The coverage of Glenda is trivial in comparison to the coverage of Plan 9 itself, but it's also quite adequate for the level of a mascot. Overall this seems to be more about Plan 9 being an OS older than most WP editors and the eternal salami-slicing to delete the articles about it. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:30, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• And now the nominator is reduced to childish edit-warring to remove sourced content on the key principles of Plan 9 itself https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs&diff=prev&oldid=646986201 Andy Dingley (talk) 18:50, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• See discussion on Talk:Plan 9 from Bell Labs: we had a bit of a misunderstanding, it seems. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 22:09, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• Redirect Merge to Plan 9 from Bell Labs. You could merge instead; the problem is, Plan 9 from Bell Labs is already pretty long. But adding in a couple of sentences re Glenda is not going to hurt. I added a caption to the logo image in Plan 9 from Bell Labs and IMO this is sufficient, but if you want to merge more into a separate paragraph that'd be OK too. Herostratus (talk) 20:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Update: Changed vote to Merge since that seems to be how its trending and let's a get consensus. Herostratus (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
• Merge (probably a selective paste merge) to Plan 9 from Bell Labs. No evidence of independent notability, can't see any justification for a separate article on the logo. Qwfp (talk) 21:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• Merge to Plan 9 from Bell Labs. No significant RS coverage on the logo independent of the operating system. Checking the Plan 9 page with Prosesize returns 15 kB (2527 words), well within the WP:SIZERULE guide for page length even with a few sentences added about the logo. Dialectric (talk) 02:43, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
• Merge to Plan 9 from Bell Labs per above. No evidence of independent notability. PianoDan (talk) 15:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

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.