Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Badlands (Star Trek)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 redirect/merge to List of Star Trek regions of space once it is created. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Badlands (Star Trek)

Badlands (Star Trek) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

The article is not notable, and is simply a repetition in an in-universe way of plot elements from the various Star Trek articles. It is thus totally duplicative and has no encyclopedic content to speak of. Judgesurreal777 21:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge/Redirect and maybe get a project to do that rather than forcing the issue. Agathoclea 22:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or Merge No notable real world info - doesn't appear to have much in-universe notability either. Ejfetters 22:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep The proposer clearly hasn't read the article, which is not about the Star Fleet universe. This cavalier attempt to delete the work of other, good-faith editors is uncivil and disruptive. Colonel Warden 00:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Read the article again, it is in-universe Star Trek article, with only a couple of sentences. Ejfetters 00:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Read the proposal again. Proposer says the article is about the "Star Fleet game". It isn't. Colonel Warden 00:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Minor detail, it has info about game and show.Ejfetters 00:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Very sorry about that, was tagged incorrectly, but the article still needs to assert notability. Judgesurreal777 01:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable in our universe, doesn't deserve it's own article. Malinaccier (talk • contribs) 01:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Article has one source demonstrating notability. Additional sources can be added. Rray (talk) 23:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
That is from a fan encyclopedia and does not count. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
With acknowledgements to User:Carcharoth: This is verifiable non-notable information that can be merged to an article on a notable topic to provide the wider context that is needed. A list does not require reliable sources to establish the independent notability of its constituent items; all that is required is that the concept being listed is notable. The individual items do not have to be notable. Wikipedia:Notability quite clearly states the following:

"If appropriate sources cannot be found, if possible, merge the article into a broader article providing context" [...] "For instance, articles on minor characters in a work of fiction may be merged into a "list of minor characters in ..."; articles on schools may be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located; relatives of a famous person may be merged into the article on the person; articles on persons only notable for being associated with a certain group or event may be merged into the main article on that group or event."

It is clear here that mergers of the locations are viable, like minor characters, and would provide sufficient context to retain brief information when any excessive plot summary info has been stripped out. As for redirecting: keeping redirects is cheap, allows categorisation e.g. by series, and prevents existing links from going red. - Fayenatic (talk) 14:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or possibly merge, but don't delete: The Badlands are the subject of at least two published novels and I believe calling The Star Trek Encyclopedia a mere "fan encyclopedia" (and thus implying it is not a reliable source) is an extreme insult to Mike and Denise Okuda, who are recognized as the authorative experts on all things Star Trek. DHowell (talk) 05:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Nothing against them, but we need stuff coming right from the mouths of the creators of this place in Star Trek, and information like that, and their synthesis would not fill in that gap. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
As he was a graphic designer and technical consultant for TNG and later series, I'd guess that Mike Okuda _is_ one of the "creators of this place".--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 18:25, 10 December 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.