Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sith Empire

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. Eluchil404 (talk) 02:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sith Empire

Sith Empire (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is a synthesis of plot elements from the Star Wars franchise, and has no notability or sourcing to speak of. all of this is covered in the articles covering the Star Wars movies, video games and novels already, so this in-universe repetition of that information is duplicative and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

By that standard, Lady_Macbeth(Shakespeare) and pages like it should also be deleted. I don't see any references in there. Its mostly "original research." Right? hahaha. Pages like these are good information and why cause information loss when you can easily fix it? If you're too lazy to fix it, then you shouldn't touch it? Most real admins are willing to put their back into things and fix problems from what I've seen, instead of being lazy and just delete everything. Ssh83 (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Question - Do you have anything to say about this particular article, rather than MacBeth and "most real admins"? --EEMIV (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Sith. There are plenty of articles on wiki that chronicles fictional settings and stories. While neither pages (sith empire and sith) are big enough to need individual articles, both contain enough unique information that neither should be outright "deleted." A thoughtfully carried out merge should be the best course of action to avoid information loss. Ssh83 (talk) 19:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC) SSH83
• Keep WP:FICT Also, where is this duplicated? RogueNinja_talk 23:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
  • • This article is a flagrant failure of WP:FICT There are no independent secondary sources. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

In the actual articles that this plot information takes place, such as the Star Wars novels and movies. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. Notable subject in that it is a consistent and recurring theme in the novels and movies. It is interesting in its own right as a subject, not unlike articles like Jedi, Wookiee, and Death Star. Tparameter (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete and redirect to Sith. Unlikely search term with unencyclopedic content. --EEMIV (talk) 02:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• Could you direct me to an agreed definition of "encyclopedic", or discussion on same? I've been quite curious of the underlying issues lately. --Kizor 03:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• WP:N. --EEMIV (talk) 03:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete no reliable sources no evidence of notability. And absurd nonsense to boot. NBeale (talk) 22:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete/redirect (to Sith): no sources establishing notability. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 11:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Is entirely a derivative of the Star Wars franchise. This makes it a copyright violation. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - Although there are plenty of reasons to delete this, this article is not a copyright violation. --EEMIV (talk) 12:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
    • The article is completely derived from copyright material. There is no creative synthesis, commentary, criticism, cross-work comparisons or any other kind of transformation derived either from the authors or from other publication. It is therefore a copyright violation as a derivative work of copyright material. If there were any creative component to the material, without third party sourcing, then those components would be judged to be original research. To avoid these problems, fiction articles are best advised to follow WP:WAF. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
• Merge to Sith although I think notability is a close call and I'd not object to a keep. [1]. Hobit (talk) 23:51, 28 January 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.