Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order D6-66
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 DELETE. dbenbenn | talk 03:44, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Order D6-66
Is it consensus that this merits a redirect? The article reads as follows, "Order D6-66 is a fictional law from the Star Wars universe. The Imperial law requires all space ships to have a time-lock device." Zero google hits, end of stub. --GRider\talk 23:58, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Merge with Galactic Empire (Star Wars). -- Riffsyphon1024 00:45, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, or merge and redir if you like. No reason given for deletion, in fact it isn't really even proposed for deletion. There is no need to list this for deletion if what you want to do is to redirect it. Either just do it, or suggest and discuss it on the article's talk page. Andrewa 00:49, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Merge or keep, and second what Andrewa said above. Kappa 01:47, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Just delete it. Unless this is somehow essential to the plot of Revenge of the Sith (and I really doubt it is), this is extreme fancruft. Individual laws from a fictional universe? This wouldn't be encyclopedic if it were a law in the real world. Delete extremely. -R. fiend 01:54, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- That is why I recommend we merge this with Galactic Empire (Star Wars). -- Riffsyphon1024 02:42, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
- LOL R. fiend. Good call, delete extremely. RaD Man (talk) 02:19, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, unless someone can tell me how this is notable.-LtNOWIS 03:42, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to agree with R. fiend this time. Delete. DaveTheRed 05:00, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- either Keep or merge and redirect to Galactic Empire (Star Wars). Megan1967 07:14, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. I agree with R. fiend. Average Earthman 10:04, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as with R.Fiend. Radiant! 11:04, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Order Delete, lucascruft. Wyss 02:01, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- This article has been Tranwikied to Star Wars Wiki - Order D6-66. -- Riffsyphon1024 22:47, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
- If there is an overwhelming consensus to delete this article about a fictional law from the make-believe universe of Star Wars, should we keep the out of bounds redirect? What is the precedent for this? --GRider\talk 18:33, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: The procedure is that if the vote here is delete, the article is deleted and no redirect is kept. The article history is also lost. That's what delete means. You seem to have a very poor understanding of the processes and purpose of VfD, and I fear you are misleading others too. Please, if you're going to nominate articles, read the comments people leave about your nominations, and if you don't understand them, let's discuss it on our personal talk pages. No change of vote. Andrewa 20:12, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- This was a very fair question; over the weekend, User:Riffsyphon1024 went through and pre-emptively created a dozen different redirects for Star Wars articles on Wikipedia to an external Star Wars wiki while VfD discussions were still open. If you do not understand this, please discuss it on our talk pages. --GRider\talk 20:19, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- For one thing, this article looks like it was going to be deleted anyway, so what difference does it make if its now on another wiki where it can survive deletion and grow as part of the SW community? There, info can be given to it by someone who can knows something. And wiki is supposed the ultimate source of information on any given subject within the Star Wars universe. Then again it may always be a stub, but the Star Wars Wiki will not delete it if it remains that way. As for this VFD, do what you want, it already exists there as a copy. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:08, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- It appears we're both asking the same question. I was and still am trying to determine the consensus for external redirects while there is an ongoing VfD discussion that is leaning towards delete. --GRider\talk 23:22, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- For one thing, this article looks like it was going to be deleted anyway, so what difference does it make if its now on another wiki where it can survive deletion and grow as part of the SW community? There, info can be given to it by someone who can knows something. And wiki is supposed the ultimate source of information on any given subject within the Star Wars universe. Then again it may always be a stub, but the Star Wars Wiki will not delete it if it remains that way. As for this VFD, do what you want, it already exists there as a copy. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:08, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- This was a very fair question; over the weekend, User:Riffsyphon1024 went through and pre-emptively created a dozen different redirects for Star Wars articles on Wikipedia to an external Star Wars wiki while VfD discussions were still open. If you do not understand this, please discuss it on our talk pages. --GRider\talk 20:19, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: The procedure is that if the vote here is delete, the article is deleted and no redirect is kept. The article history is also lost. That's what delete means. You seem to have a very poor understanding of the processes and purpose of VfD, and I fear you are misleading others too. Please, if you're going to nominate articles, read the comments people leave about your nominations, and if you don't understand them, let's discuss it on our personal talk pages. No change of vote. Andrewa 20:12, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- If there is an overwhelming consensus to delete this article about a fictional law from the make-believe universe of Star Wars, should we keep the out of bounds redirect? What is the precedent for this? --GRider\talk 18:33, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- merge if there is an appropriate article. Moving things onto the SW wiki does not aid consensus here on Wikipedia b/c at the end of the day it's no different from actor info being on IMDB, it's unrelated. Which is not to say that ppl shouldn't move it over there... -- Lochaber 18:42, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Strong delete, nn lucascruft. ComCat 02:47, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- strong delete, unless the fan who created said cruft wishes it to be merged into Galactic Empire (Star Wars). shouldn't this have happened already??? Avriette 21:50, 26 Mar 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.
