Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chief of operations

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 E Pluribus Anthony disqualifies a merge, so no consensus; keep. STANDARD DISCLAIMER: THIS AFD IS A METRIC OF CONSENSUS NOW AND SHOULD NOT BE USED TO GAUGE CONSENSUS IN THE FUTURE. DO NOT CITE THIS AFD AS REASON TO SUPPORT OR OPPOSE A MERGE/REDIRECT/WHATEVER IN THE FUTURE. Johnleemk | Talk 14:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chief of operations

According to its history I created this page, but I have no memory of doing so. Reading it now I don’t think its notable enough. Philip Stevens 12:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I don't see the usefulness of an article about a fictional job title / rank. Mention it in Star Trek, if it's so notable. PJM 12:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• Comment While of some note, this shouldn't be in the main article (which is already long) but in subarticles; see below. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 16:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• Move/retitle or redirect. I'm sure such an article can be expanded to describe this fictional posting, also held by Data and Harry Kim (though both are referred to slightly differently). As such, it should be moved/retitled to chief operations officer (Star Trek). Moreover (if this is unworkable), I wonder if the article should be redirected to an actual managerial posting of chief operating officer for which there's an abundance of text and various redirects (e.g., chief operations officer). E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into Comparative ranks and insignia of Star Trek. Essexmutant 15:48, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• Comment This isn't a rank per se but a position aboard 'Starfleet units': compare with actual positions of commanding officer, executive officer, et al. As well, there's a meaty article that deals with those fictional ranks. That's why I've suggested the move above. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 15:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. fancruft Incognito 06:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• I would say to merge per above. However, Philip Stevens is the only contributor to this page and can request its deletion by tagging it with {{db-author}}. Stifle 16:26, 18 January 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.