Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/💮

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 Emoji. J04n(talk page) 11:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

💮

💮 (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)

Completing nomination on behalf of User:JohnBlackburne, whose rationale (as per WT:AFD) is included verbatim below. On the merits, I have no opinion. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 13:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Not a suitable topic for an encyclopaedia. Not notable: the ref is a list in which it's an entry, while googling turns up nothing (literally – zero results). Sole article in Category:Unicode_character, which suggests despite there being thousands of them there's no need for articles on characters. Transwiki to wiktionary if such characters have pages there.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 13:44, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

• Support Deletion. Not an encyclopaedic article. drewmunn talk 14:04, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. 16:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. 16:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

• Merge to emoji, which already contains brief descriptions of the meanings of some of these Japanese symbols. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
• Delete This shows up to me as nothing more than a blue square. Running Chrome on Win7 64, and I'll note I can read any Japanese text just fine. Is this something only Mac users can see or something? Because if that's the case then we should just delete it. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Comment. I can see them on this machine, where I have all sorts of random fonts installed, but not on my laptop. The emoji article displays the set of them, and most are linked; 👷 (a stylized man in a hard hat) goes to construction worker, for instance. This picture is a stylized black and white drawing of a seven petalled flower. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 00:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Comment Sorry, not seeing that either... and that article, wow, it's just a bunch of squares. I can display Mongolian script, but apparently not "Emoji". §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Seven? I see ten petals at http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1F300.pdf (five behind/between five). – Fayenatic London 18:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• Delete, not independently notable as a symbol. if we do merges of such items, merge to emoji. PS its category is very odd, put that up for CFD just now.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
• Redirect to emoji. The only reference on the page seems to be to somebody's personal web page marked "Temporary notes". But it's reasonable to redirect unicode symbols to a table of them. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Comment That source listed is not just "somebody's personal webpage" it's hosted on unicode.org by Markus Scherer, a Google engineer who co-authored the relevant section of the Unicode 6.0 spec. I've added an additional reference link to the unicode symbol table PDF where this character is shown but with no comments/description. His notes, however "temporary" are literally one of the two places on the web where this random symbol (included on the Emoji set on every iOS/Mac device) is even briefly documented. Petree (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• Merge to emoji, as there is some worthwhile narrative about this character. – Fayenatic London 18:28, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
• Merge to emoji per other merge recommendations. This character doesn't render for me, but even if it did I would still recommend such a merge. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:42, 4 March 2013 (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.