Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DRADIS

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 delete. Pascal.Tesson (talk) 14:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DRADIS

DRADIS (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable piece of in-universe information that has no relevance outside of the work of fiction. Wikipedia is not a repository of obscure technical information about fictional universes. Chardish (talk) 22:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Could a hacked down version of the article be merged in as a section to Battlestar (re-imagining) and redirected? I know that the article and the subject are not appropriate for Wikipedia, but I also think that people are going to be looking for this, and a soft redirect to non-Wikimedia wikis (i.e. Battlestar Wiki) has been established as A Bad ThingTM -- saberwyn 00:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I vote keep. I tend to err on the side of keeping articles unless they are erroneous or truly useless. I, for one, did search to find out what DRADIS was an acronym for. I agree that Wikipedia is not a repository of in-universe trivia. But on the other hand, a fictional term can often reach a point of usage where many people will hear it and want to know more about it (they may hear it outside the context of the show, for instance). I should note that LCARS (which comes from Star Trek) has an article. --Kebes (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - Non-notable plot device. Unless there are citations addressing real-world development or critical reaction, I think this is something that cannot be appropriately covered by Wikipedia. --EEMIV (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete The simply is not enough in-universe information about DRADIS to support a separate article. Indeed, as best as I can tell the second paragraph is more speculation then canon (BSG avoids getting too stuck in technical details). Take that away, and you just have references to three episodes.-- danntm T C 18:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep as article definitely asserts out of universe influence and notability: "DRADIS is so notable outside the Battlestar Galactica Universe that a number of real computer computer programs have been named by it.[1] [2]". Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:PLOT. To respond to Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles, I think the sentence you quote serves more to justify the article's existence than to actually inform the reader in any meaningful way. Jakew (talk) 21:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
    • As it has out of universe context, it passes WP:PLOT. The sentence can be reworded per Wikipedia:SOFIXIT and additional information from the references can be incorporated into the article. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 21:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
      • I'm afraid I disagree. First, I think it's missing the point of PLOT to have a relatively large amount of in-universe information and then a single (frankly useless) sentence asserting out-of-universe notability. Second, I would question whether anything can be written around those references (a blog post and a Sourceforge project's home page). Finally, although I may have missed something, my searches through Google Scholar and Books failed to identify any suitable references for out-of-universe material (and precious few for in-universe material, for that matter). Best wishes, Jakew (talk) 21:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
        • Something with appearances in a notable franchise (film, television series, video game, etc.) that has influenced out of universe is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 17:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete The in-universe definition of the term itself (Direction, RAnge, and DIStance) provided in the article is actually unsourced, and a handful of de minimis out-of-universe references just isn't enough to keep it in. And I would also suggest deletion of LCARS per the previous poster. 71.199.115.131 (talk) 03:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable fictional technology on a fiction show which has not received significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. Content of article is mostly plot summary as well. Doctorfluffy (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • merge with suitable redirect-- which does not require afd. Too insubstantial for a separate article. . DGG (talk) 21:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment; I'd love to have a good article on this subject, but - while I believe real-world notability is there - I don't think we have the real-world reliable sources to justify it. However, the term DRADIS is a reasonable search term, and so should absolutely redirect to the series in some fashion if the article is deleted. The likely target would be the re-imagined series article, as noted above. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 00:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable piece of in-universe information. Dorftrottel (harass) 14:45, May 8, 2008
  • Delete per nom. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
comment plus... it is mainly funcract (no real world information except an unreferenced line). Not really worth to have in Wikipedia. Any usefull info can be added in the Battlestar Galactica article. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
No no no no nonono. Not to the top level, this is far too insignificant to the grand scheme for that. A redirect should go no higher up the food chain than If there was anywhere you could something along the lines of "DRADIS is the equvalent of radar in the 2004/reimagined BSG series", that would be a worthwhile redirect to (somehwere like Battlestar (re-imagining), Battlestar Galactica (ship) or a "List of terms in Battlestar Galactica" article). -- saberwyn 10:12, 9 May 2008 (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.