Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MS-17 Galbaldy Alpha

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 was Delete. Avi 19:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MS-17 Galbaldy Alpha

MS-17 Galbaldy Alpha (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unsourced and non-notable fancruft and/or original research. Zero assertion of real world significance. Merely a plot summary. Contested prod.

And remember, don't just vote keep because you like it. If you do so, you're expected to address the problems above. MER-C 08:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is the tip of the iceberg I fear... The Rambling Man 09:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, it is. This nomination is part of a systematic purge of Gundam articles I started, which is still ongoing. It was once far worse: [1] [2] [3]. MER-C 09:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Merge to main article on the series or to Principality of Zeon per WP:FICT. Isn't notable enough to merit its own article, but I wouldn't call it OR (how can anything be OR that comes directly from a published series?). Walton monarchist89 10:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete/merge/but probably best to send over to Gundam wiki. I've also nominated a whole chunk of these for deletion, and I fear that very few of these have the potential to become encyclopedic. Moreschi ^Deletion! 11:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete from Wikipedia. Would be right at home in a Wiki devoted to the series. All original research. No evidence it has multiple independent coverages in reliable sources. Edison 20:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Merge per the other articles like this. Yes, I agree that they can't stand on their own, (*looks at infobox* dear GOD no) but it would be nice to be able to have a chance to merge these into a minor character list-ish article. It's not OR, most of the info is from the series itself or the official website. I myself am going to go through and push for some merges (albeit I'm starting with the series I'm more familiar with) but that's a lot of articles to deal with right away. Tiakalla 08:40, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:FICT on minor fictional elements not getting their own articles and WP:NOT#IINFO on plot summary. 'Merge' may not be consistent with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) which suggests out-of-universe perspective and discourages this kind of in-universe focus. I agree with Moreschi that it would be welcomed at the Gundam wiki.--maclean 01:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Find sources: books, news, scholar Addhoc 20:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per above searches... Addhoc 20:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Merge per Walton monarchist89. This mecha has no model kits of it and has not appeared in any genre-spanning titles (e.g. Super Robot Wars) so it lacks real world impact as is. MalikCarr 04:16, 8 February 2007 (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.