Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gopher+

Gopher+

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not meet WP:GNG and WP:NSOFT. I could not find enough reliable sources on Gopher+, probably because it "was never widely adopted by Gopher servers" as lead suggests. Dreamyshade attempted to improve this article after I WP:PRODed it, but Dreamyshade only found two emails in a public mailing list which mention Gopher+. Neither email is-indepth (only couple sentences about Gopher+). Neither email is independent, because they are written by people connected with Gopher+ who are just chatting about Gopher like on a forum or IRC. Therefore I believe there is no single WP:RS which would count towards notability. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Anton.bersh (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping for @Dreamyshade: you might be interested in this discussion.

Merge as proposed into Gopher (protocol) or delete if nobody else thinks it is worth a merge. Clearly not notable enough for its own article. W Nowicki (talk) 22:07, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Content seems relevant, but tweet-long. Should also have more inline citations for the features. BernardoSulzbach (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Sources found include an Ars Technical article and a chapter in the 1995 book Internet Publishing Handbook. There isn't a lot of depth to the coverage, but there is basic verifiability of Gopher+'s existence, it's implementation in Gopher servers, and its role in Gopher history. Because Gopher+ is almost always discussed in the Gopher context, a selective merge to Gopher (protocol) makes good sense. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 21:54, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Yes, I looked at this and tagged it for merge into Gopher (protocol) - it's valid information with adequate sourcing available for verifiability, but not enough for its own article. Dreamyshade (talk) 15:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]