Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern Alliance (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 00:31, 23 April 2017

Eastern Alliance

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

Minor fictional element with no notability.The only reason it survived the first AfD is that Wikipedia is written by geeks (including myself), and we have inherent weakness for our geeky fiction. Sadly, now we also have rules on notability. Fortunately, we also have ficiton wikias (http://galactica.wikia.com/wiki/Eastern_alliance) so there's will be no loss when we delete it. Those days, people who want to learn about fiction trivia like this go to wikia anyway. PS. Yes, yes, existence of wikia is not an argument in AfD, just a side-comment; in case anyone has doubts my main concern is the total lack of notability displayed by this in-universe entry, and its total lack of significance or real world impact. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:41, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - A rather minor element of the series, that was only a part of a very small handful of episodes. The article is mostly just plot, and there are almost no reliable sources discussing it in any way. The two books already included in the article as sources are pretty much it, and one of them (An analytical guide to television's Battlestar Galactica) is little more than a plot summary, and the other (Battlestar Galactica and Philosophy) just barely mentions them. Basically, the few, quoted passages that are in the "Reception" section of the article is the entire extent of sources that discuss the topic, which just simply is not enough to sustain an article. I was initially considering a redirect, but as it is such a generic name, I don't really think that's necessary. 64.183.45.226 (talk) 17:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep GNG is met with sources already included in the article. Failing that, a merge might be appropriate but WP:ATD makes it perfectly clear that even if deemed non-notable, deletion is not an option when there is an appropriate merge target. Jclemens (talk) 00:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 :<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Television|list of Television-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 23:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)</small>
 :<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America|list of United States of America-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 23:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)</small>
+*'''Keep''' GNG is met with sources already included in the article.  Failing that, a merge might be appropriate but [[WP:ATD]] makes it perfectly clear that even if deemed non-notable, deletion is not an option when there is an appropriate merge target. [[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]] ([[User talk:Jclemens|talk]]) 00:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)