Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Planetary-size comparison

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 no consensus to do anything, from the below. Pursuing an editoral-based merge may be good, though. Daniel 04:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Planetary-size comparison

Planetary-size comparison (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article appears to have no clear purpose. The text reads like a school essay. The way, the truth, and the light 07:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep: What's the rationale for deletion here? I don't see the reasoning behind saying it has 'no clear purpose' and though the nom may think it reads like a school essay it's certainly not original research. Nick mallory 07:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep: It's all encyclopedic content. More sources would be nice, but this shouldn't be deleted. Useight 07:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. This looks like a decent scientific information page that may be useful. Perhaps it could do with a descriptive intro paragraph and maybe even a rename, but the content seems fine. Cquan (after the beep...) 07:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: Showing the relative sizes is useful and the data on the sizes is provided. It could be merged with the List of solar system objects by radius but make sure the table and the gallery are kept. I don't see why this should be deleted.
  • Delete - Wikipedia is not an indisciminate collector of information. The diameters can be obtained from other lists and tables, and table of the ratios of each object's diameter to each other's is bith confusing and trivial. (If someone wants to know the ratio and the diameters of Jupiter and Pluto, they are much more likely to use a calculator than to go off looking for this article, assuming that they even know it exists.) --EMS | Talk 17:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. This information is redundant - planetary statistics are available in multiple other articles, including (but likely not limited to) the individual planet articles, Planet, Solar System, List of solar system objects by radius, Dwarf planet, Natural satellite .. need I go on? I know that Wikipedia is not paper, but repeating the same information again and again - and in this instance with no additional context - seems silly. Arkyan • (talk) 17:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to List of solar system objects by radius. No need to repeat stats, as Arkyan says. The table should be either be deleted (my preference), or at least have a title or explanation. But definitely keep the gallery somewhere. Clarityfiend 17:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to List of solar system objects by radius...wasn't aware of that one. This is double information coverage to be sure. My previous keep is striken. Cquan (after the beep...) 17:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge as per above two comments Alex Pankratov 00:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete nothing to merge, redundant with List of solar system objects by radius and others. The way, the truth, and the light 01:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Comment. This is a re-expression by the nominator of his desire to delete the article. Spacepotato 03:58, 9 June 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.