Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Han shot first (2nd nomination)

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 keep. — TKD::Talk 06:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Han shot first

Han shot first (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Trivia and fancruft. Metrackle 07:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I'm not sure how to vote just yet; but the phrase gets Google News hits, and the consensus of the last AfD was a solid "keep". Ichormosquito 07:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This is a notable controversy within Star Wars fandom, and has achieved quite a bit of media coverage. Article should be improved with reference to this coverage, but that doesn't make it an invalid article. JulesH 09:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep Nominator has not bothered to construct a decent argument for deletion and has added absolutely nothing to the debate from the last AfD that ended with a keep. Irishjp 10:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - This is a well-known controversy about Star Wars and is not mere trivia. --Hnsampat 11:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Bad deletion rationale, I see no arguments for deletion that weren't raised at the last AFD which ended in keep. Darksun 11:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep I can see people looking up this specific term after seeing the coffee mugs, t-shirts, posters, and bumperstickers with the saying on it. The article is sourced. I can't imagine why this would be nominated yet again. Turlo Lomon 12:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep with a possibly redirect to List of changes in Star Wars re-releases Will ^(talk) 16:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and rename to "Han Shot First Controversy", or something like that. It's got potential as a stand-alone, but the title doesn't strike me as encyclopedic. Silly, I know, but I'm a stickler for things like that! :-) Sidatio 16:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. It's a pretty well-known controversy, and the article seems to be well-sourced. --Optichan 17:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 19:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Question Perhaps this article might be merged with the article on Han Solo or one on the controversy regarding edits made to the SW films for the remake? FrozenPurpleCube 21:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, per above argumentation. --Koveras ^☭ 21:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, per JulesH. Mathmo ^Talk 00:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep Notable controversy, consensus from last AfD was pretty strong. Ichormosquito 21:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• keep - last afd was closed on July 7, 2007. Is there a way to put a moratorium on Afd's that are relisted within some short time period? Seems to push the boundary of bad faith. --Rocksanddirt 22:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Someone needs to shut this down already. We've definitely got consensus. Sidatio 23:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep without rename. Quoting from part of WP:NAME: "standing expression exists if most English speakers who are aware of the topic call it the same thing." Most people who are aware of Han shot first call it "Han shot first" and not "Han shot first controversy." Thus a rename is not appropriate, especially since there is no potential ambiguity. --JayHenry 14:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Deleting this article may be the worst idea since Greedo shooting first. Cstella23 14:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep i'd like to add that to me it seems that the nomiator wanted to have just thrown this up there for the heck of it. 172.191.100.66 20:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Merge - this is not a stand-alone topic. Merge to Mr. Solo's vernerable article and move on. And it is just fancruft; it has no bearing to anyone except fans. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 08:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
• comment Delete Now this is an example of a non-encyclopedic topic--and it would normally be best as a single item in a popular culture article, that is, if we still will have any such articles a week from now. This is not a comment on those deletions, nor POINT--I do not think this individual line the least bit important. Priorities around here have always puzzled me. I guess everyone is puzzled by them, but in different ways. DGG (talk) 03:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC) Changed, I hadn't realized this was up a week ago. Unimportant or not, a renom this soon is just plain wrong, and it's time we actually had a rule. I am proposing one now, on the Talk page for AfD. Opinion invited. DGG (talk) 03:17, 4 August 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.