Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Planetary classification nomenclature

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 22:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Planetary classification nomenclature

Duplicate of Star_Trek_planet_classifications, which is far more complete and has better presentation (although I cannot attest to its accuracy). I have not suggested merge and redirect because the article title does not indicate that it is about Star Trek and fictional, but could give the initial impression that it was factual. Gloop 10:58, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

I've noticed a couple of pages that link to it, but they could easily be changed to point to the more complete article. OTOH, if no-one has a problem with the article title then a redirect would be the quickest solution.Gloop 11:13, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

• delete the articles that point to it should be fixed, but a redirect is inaccurate. There is no suggestion in the title that this doesn't deal with the actual planets. Bandraoi 12:10, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per Bandraoi. Tonywalton  | Talk 12:48, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
• Planet has a "classification" section, and cites papers written by astronomers on the subject of planetary classification schemes. Maybe the section will one day grow large enough to warrant breaking out into a planetary classification article. However, this article isn't about the actual classification of real planets in the real world, and bears no relation whatever to how astronomers classify planets. It's about a fictional classification scheme for fictional planets — a subject that we already have thoroughly covered under a title that doesn't misleadingly conflate the real world with fiction. Delete. Uncle G 14:25:33, 2005-09-10 (UTC)
• Delete and do not redirect, as per above votes. Fernando Rizo T/C 19:00, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and Fernando Rizo. Alf ^melmac 20:57, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, duplicate with suggestive name. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:21, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. no redirect to Trek, if redirected should go to Planet. People looking for this info would probably start at Star Trek anyway. - WCFrancis 21:53, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. If rediercted, do not redirect to a Star Trek article; redirect to planet or another real-world topic, or just leave it deleted. -Sean Curtin 20:23, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, no redirect, in agreement with Uncle G and WCFrancis. Barno 20:29, 12 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.