Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OSUNIX

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 delete. A redirect can be created by WP:BOLD, with possible subsequent discussion, but I will not create it myself.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OSUNIX

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

(Defunct?) software which doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. Someone not using his real name (talk) 00:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Someone not using his real name (talk) 00:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to OpenSolaris. I remember reading about OSUNIX some years (it had a website that looked like an anime fanzine rather than an OS website) ago but it never got off the ground. I'm surprised to read that it had support from Software in the Public Interest, but that alone does not confer notability. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 16:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Frankly for a even a redirect to be worthwhile, it would need WP:SECONDARY sources (for citation) in the target article, which should actually be Illumos. OSUNIX seems to have been is a typical FOSS spat—a fork threat that didn't even materialize. [1] D'Amore blogged about it in response [2] (as he was the main target of the OSUNIX folks' criticism), but no independent sources seem to have covered the incident so it's not only non notable but would probably be even be WP:UNDUE to mention it just from those primary sources. (How many email/blog spats have involved Linus? Do they all go into the article on Linux?) Looking at [3] it seems all that ever happened with OSUNIX was a one-man version 0.0.1 in 2009 followed by someone using the list for a tantrum in 2011. Someone not using his real name (talk) 04:13, 25 December 2013 (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.