Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of the Phoenix (organisation)

Order of the Phoenix (organisation)

The article asserts no notability, and has no real world sources to discuss it; as such, it is just a repetition of the plot of several Harry Potter books, and since the plot of those books is covered in their own articles, this article is just duplicative and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 04:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - As per nom. Damn though; reading through this article spoiled the ending for me! (Dumbledore dies!? Nooooo....) :( Everything here can be found in the appropriate articles... Cheers, Spawn Man 04:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep Effectively collects information from the 7 book articles into 1 place. By the way, what is it with you and Harry Potter deletions? Geez. Wl219 05:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Me or Judges? For me, I actually work for Voldemort and am secretly planning to destroy him; starting off by eliminating all traces of him from Wikipedia!!!!! Muahahahaha!!!! Spawn Man 05:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Notable fictional organization, just like Umbrella Corporation, Springfield Nuclear Power Plant and so on. After all, it's definitely the subject of numerous book reviews, and Time magazine hyping (I've read an article about the order several years back).--Alasdair 06:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Notable part of the Harry Potter series, covered in multiple books, reviews etc. Fosnez 07:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep extremely important part of an extremely notable series of literature, and the central aspect of book 5. Nominator is incorrect that no real-world sources discuss it: not only is it obviously discussed in countless reviews, it's also a center of discussion regarding the supposed real-world political themes found in the books, especially the last 4. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep Too long to merge, too unencyclopedic to really keep. Maybe moving it somewhere else would be more appropriate? M1ss1ontomars2k4 15:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep as per Alasdair. Order of the Phoenix is probably even more notable to the average citizen than the Hanso Foundation. wikipediatrix 18:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No secondary sources to establish notability or provide real world context. Keep in mind, sources must provide significant coverage, not just mentions. Also, simply saying something is notable doesn't make it true. Jay32183 18:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Though the article needs a lot of work, its subject is a very very large part of the Harry Potter books.--Gyrcompass 19:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • The article still fails WP:N and WP:FICT. Jay32183 19:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    • OK, that makes since. I've removed my vote. Remember though, those are guidelines, and they have exceptions.--Gyrcompass 21:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
      • Exceptions are determined by the strength of the argument, not the number of people arguing. Jay32183 21:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
        • Right, and the arguement for an exception here is strong. The Harry Potter books have sold 325 million copies, and since the name of one of them derives from this organization, this organization is probably significant enough to have its own short article.--152.23.100.89 23:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
          • That's a very weak argument actually. The organization needs real world significance, not fictional universe significance. Jay32183 23:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. Firstly, it satisfies WP:FICT by the obvious fact that it's crucial to the notable Harry Potter world (so much so, in fact, that it's even in the title of the latest book). This conferred notability is why Mos Eisley, SPECTRE, Hanso Foundation, Purity Control, Springfield Nuclear Power Plant, Starfleet, H.I.V.E., Syndicate (The X-Files) and the Stanfield Organization all have articles. Secondly, it gets 925 Google News hits at this moment. wikipediatrix 21:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • WP:FICT is about sources with real world context not importance to the plot. The sources need to have significant coverage of the fictional organization. A search for "Order of the Phoenix" will find a good deal of sources on the book and the film, so you can't trust the number. Jay32183 21:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You are apparently just arguing now for the sake of arguing. The 925 Google News hits I just mentioned obviously are the real world context, and the fact that the Order of the Phoenix is in the title of the book and film is precisely why it's notable. Finally, WP:FICT is not policy and therefore invoking it in an AfD process is not criteria for deletion. wikipediatrix 22:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You've shown that the book and the film are notable, not the organization. notability is not inherited. You need sources about the organization, not about the book and the film. Being a guideline does not mean you can ignore WP:FICT for no reason, WP:ONLYESSAY. Jay32183 23:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:ONLYESSAY isn't policy either. wikipediatrix 23:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - Should we delete S.P.E.C.T.R.E. from James Bond too? SolidPlaid 23:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • The answer to that question could very well be "yes", which is why other stuff exists is considered a bad argument. Jay32183 23:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment - Okay, let's delete Number since a number is only an abstract idea that occurs in some books. SolidPlaid 23:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)