Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Gilead

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 of the debate was keep. W.marsh 01:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Republic of Gilead

This is basically the same as the page for The Handmaid's Tale. Almost all of it is copied word-for-word, so there's no reason to have this page up when it adds nothing new. Slinga 00:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as unencyclopedic. Royboycrashfan 00:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge any useful info with and redirect to The Handmaid's Tale. PJM 01:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep and remove from The Handmaid's Tale, where it bloats that article. The Handmaid's Tale should be about The Handmaid's Tale, not the Republic of Gilead. Melchoir 01:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree with the notability arguments below, but I have a hang-up on principle: AfD is a poor tool for resolving merge/split decisions. On the other hand, if this article were deleted and/or redirected, it would hamper future splits, so I'll unweak myself. Melchoir 06:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge notable information and then redirect. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect Nothing worth merging that's not already in A Handmaid's Tale. Fan1967 03:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Notable addition to Category:Fictional countries. Atwood spun together an interesting world with The Handmaid's Tale and it is a notable novel in Canada. If Middle-Earth gets an article why not this? CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 04:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Middle-Earth exists across several books and media. There is enough information about it per se to justify a separate article.

Gilead, by contrast, exists in only one book and, once you get past "future USA run by ultra-fundamentalist Christians," there's not a whole hell of a lot more you can say about it. Redirect. Daniel Case 14:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep as notable fictional country. Capitalistroadster 06:32, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Capitalistroadster, fictional country of note. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable fictional country. --Terence Ong 10:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Capitalistroadster. Content will change over time.Vizjim 12:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect. If it's part of a book, the content belongs in the article of that book.
• Keep per Capitalistroadster. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 14:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Better in this context. Honbicot 15:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect. It can still be listed as a notable fictional country, but it has not existence outside The Handmaid's Tale, so it doesn't need an article outside The Handmaid's Tale, either. --- GWO
• Redirect When its the subject of multiple books it may deserve a separate article. Thatcher131 16:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. An encyclopedia is for informational articles about the world we live in, not every fictional world created by novelists. Brian G. Crawford 16:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Most editors would beg to differ with you, since we have very extensive articles, character profiles, location articles, etc. on numerous fictional works such as Harry Potter, Animorphs and Star Wars, to name a few. Grandmasterka 16:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Well known fictional country. JoshuaZ 17:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Notable enough to have its own article apart from the one on the book, its film adaptations, etc. 18:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this is not needed. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 21:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect - notable, but a word for word copy is grounds for redirect to the parent. Georgewilliamherbert 07:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - As aforestated, we have plenty of fictional articles. Heck, look at the article for Freedonia. This article does have a place on wikipedia, but I suggest that someone make some attempt to make it different from the other article. Siyavash 12:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect. The country exists in 1 (one) book. It's a fine book, but since there is no information about the world outside that book, there is no need for the separate article about the world. Middle Earth, and, yes, even Freedonia, have references outside their 1 source. This one doesn't. When there is another reference to the Republic of Gilead, or when the Handmaid's Tale article gets too long, RoG can get its own article, not until then. GRuban 16:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Capitalroadster. Ardenn 06:22, 8 March 2006 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.