Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Heinlein Trio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was merge. -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:23, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A Heinlein Trio

This article will never mature beyond a stub, because there isn't any content beyond stub content. It's a reprint of three books. That's all that can be said. Snowspinner 01:05, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep, it's Heinlein and may be helpful to someone. Wyss 02:12, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • What content can you figure out to expand? If the article is only ever going to be a list of the three books it contains, there's no content to be helpful. We are not a card catalogue. What content can ever possibly be added to this article? Snowspinner 04:50, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Obviously useful.--Centauri 03:07, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, agree quite strongly with Wyss on this one. —RaD Man (talk) 04:29, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 05:03, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)
  • Delete. It sets a bad precedent to have an article for a collection of previously published stories. If i wanted more info on a story in one of my Heinlein collections, i'd look up the title of the story. foobaz·✐ 05:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Random compilation albums, books etc are annoying. Merge into List of Heinlein books or Heinlein. Kappa 06:26, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, useful. Megan1967 06:27, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, an important compilation by one of the most influential aurhors of early science fiction. This compilation is important because of the socio-political message of all three groups. The historical context ("Pan-Asian" xenophobia) - which, although culturally acceptible aat the time, in a modern context shows what now would be considered obvious, blatant racism of the author that is not reflected, but influenced in his later work, including the cultural mileston, Stranger in a Strange Land. -- DAVODD 06:33, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
    • All the individual titles already have articles. What's "important" about this particular compilation? Calton 12:37, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment: If there was anything in the article to indicate it was more than a random compilation, I might change my vote. Kappa 07:44, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into the "Editions" and "Publication History" sections in the articles on the individual books. All the relevant information can still be preserved, and is more useful, in those sections. Nateji77 12:28, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's an omnibus edition of three books that already have their own articles. What more could possibly be said about it that doens't go into the individual articles, or the one on Heinlein himself? Calton 12:37, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • It doesn't so much matter what can be said about it, but rather that someone searching for "A Heinlein Trio" on wikipedia will find out exactly what it is on that page, which means that it will have fulfilled its purpose as an encyclopedia. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 13:26, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)
      • Comment: No, that would mean that WP has fulfilled a library index's purpose, which is not WP's. Barno 20:04, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into articles on the individual books. If there was evidence that this could be expanded beyond a stub, I would change my vote to "Keep". Carrp | Talk 13:30, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. If anybody thinks it is a notable fact about Heinlein that his publisher decided to print three of his novels together, then it should be mentioned in the Heinlein article, or perhaps in the articles about the novels. (We have an article on each of the three novels already.) If a particular edition of a novel or compilation of novels was so notable to book collectors or for some other reason then we could conceivably have articles about them. For example, perhaps the term "Heinlein Trio" occurs frequently in discussions of his work. But the independent notability would have to be established. It has not been in this case. --BM 15:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect, probably to Heinlein. Each of the novels already has a separate article. The marketing decision to republish three of them as an anthology is not encyclopedic. Rossami (talk) 18:50, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge relevance (as provided above by DAVODD ) to the three stories' articles and to Heinlein. Since one term can't redirect multiple places, also Redirect to Heinlein. I noticed as a kid that several RAH stories from a certain period had that Pan-Asian xenophobia that didn't feel like his later work. This is "notable" to Heinlein fans, some general SF fans, and people studying racism in literature, but doesn't stand on its own as an encyclopedic item. Agree with comments that compilations aren't generally separately notable enough for inclusion. Barno 20:04, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, in no way warrants deletion under the Deletion policy. Dan100 21:39, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with the Bibliography section of Robert A. Heinlein and redirect. Gamaliel 05:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge (what little extra there is - basically the publisher and the individual titles) with Robert A. Heinlein and remove circular link from the latter. Uncle G 17:47, 2005 Feb 11 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. Don't see any avenues for expansion. Noisy | Talk 01:15, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge => Robert A. Heinlein Courtland 05:47, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)
  • Merge to Robert A. Heinlein - this volume didn't add anything to the Heinlen canon, in itself. CDC (talk) 03:01, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.