Talk:Planet killer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on August 28, 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Contents

[edit] Re:afd

Re: the AfD, I have begun to listify and prune here. Wl219 07:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Halo?

Is Halo really a planet killer? It doesn't really kill planets, or even mess up their enivironments. As far as anybody knows, it just kills sentient life. I guess it'd qualify as a super-weapon, but it's not technically a planet killer.

[edit] Preferred methods: really preferred?

In literature, quick methods of destruction are also used. An example (which I've seen in a couple independent novels, and which also is a method of planet destruction that doesn't require one ultimate one-of-a-kind weapon): In the Honor Harrington series, in Vernor Vinge's A Fire Upon the Deep, and probably in many others, relativistic missiles are used to destroy planets with kinetic energy. --SpaceCaptain 00:25, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Of course, actually using cee-fractional kinetic strikes to obliterate a planet is a violation of the Deneb Accords, and it'll bring the Solarian League down upon you like there's no tomorrow. . . ;) --Anville 20:59, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Terminology

Is 'planet killer' the most widely used term for this type of device (outside of Babylon 5)? As I noted in the article, Star Wars uses 'superweapon'. A Fire Upon the Deep uses 'world-wrecker'. Some non-canon Star Trek materials used 'planetcracker' or 'planet wrecker'. I seem to recall having read 'God-weapon' somewhere. Is there a generic term at all? --SpaceCaptain 00:40, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. I find the current title more fictious and poetic than scientific. After all a planet is not a living organism in itself, so can we really use the verb to kill for masses of stacked elements? We should perhaps consider renaming the title to "Planet Destroyer" or "Interplanar Weapon". --Unissakävelijä 10:34, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
Of course the name is fictitious - there are no real weapons of this power. It would be an acceptable name if it were the standard science fiction term, but it isn't. What did you mean by "interplanar weapon"? I've never heard that term. --SpaceCaptain 18:27, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
Personally I think Planet killer is a good name as any, Planet destroyer or Planet buster could work too, though many of the weapons listed don't destroy the planet as such, merely kill everyone and everything on it. Maybe something like Weapons of planetary mass destruction could be used (or should it be Weapons of planetary scale mass destruction, a bit unsure about the propper grammar of that one). Other "random" names off the top of my head: Extermination level event trigger, Planatary extermination weapon, Planetary steriliser (yeah, I'm just making those up). Personaly I'm fine with Planet killer though, the planet might not be alive, but IMHO stripping all life from a planet could best be described as killing it. Dead world is after all fairly commonly used to describe for life-less planets (at least in fiction) even though planets are neither alive or dead. --Sherool 23:53, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
We should just stick with "Planet Killer" and make redirects for the more plausible names. They all mean much the same thing anyway, and there is little terminological consensus. --maru 17:34, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
Sounds like a plan. I added a bunch of redirect pages for some of the more "likely" names (IMHO). Check the "what links here" page for the article for a full list. If anyone know of more "synonymes" for "planet killer" that people would be likely to search for pleace add those too. I merely added some of the ones mentioned on this page (and some variations on the same). --Sherool 22:44, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

This has to be one of the poorest written articles I've ever read. "Nigh-indestructible"? "These were destroyed by pitting them against the only foe that could defeat them-themselves."

[edit] Base Delta Zero's link

The link for Base Delta Zero (Star Wars) is to Orbital_bombardment, which does not quite refer to Star Wars itself. Should the link be changed or removed or should there be an added article or is there an article available that refers to the actual text of the link -- namely, Base Delta Zero itself?

  • Last time I checked(when I made the link), there was no article for Base Delta Zero, so I just linked it to the closest (neutral)article. - SAMAS
Probably best to just redlink it, then, so that people will know that Wikipedia doesn't currently have any information about the subject. Bryan 03:40, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Death Star edit

It is impossible for the Death Star to produce thirty-thousand years worth of Sol's output in a single blast. The STAR WARS novelization even states this. Darth Sidious 18:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

That's a case of a common phenomenon: canon/science conflict. The Death Star is not supposed to have the power to destroy a planet significantly larger than the Earth-like planets it demonstrates capacity to destroy - but the blast it produces is such overkill that it could obviously do much more. SpaceCaptain 03:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mass Shadow Generator: a planet killer?

Mass Shadow Generators do not kill planets (except Centerpoint Station). They drag ships out of hyperspace. If it was so, then Interdictor cruisers would be able to wipe out planets. I'm removing that one.


[edit] Niven's Bussard Ramjet?

IIRC, wasn't the Known Space Bussard Ramjet supposed to destroy life on the planet via the direct application of its magnetic fields? I know that Niven makes repeated references (albeit poorly explained) in multiple stories to the point that being exposed to the field of an active ramjet is violently fatal to complex life forms. Reference The Ethics of Madness for example.--5th earth 12:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Borg Cube?

Wasn't the Borg Cube in Star Trek a planet killer?--Dan 17:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Not that I recall. (Their rivals, Species 8472, did have a planet killer...) And please sign your comments. SpaceCaptain 00:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought there were flashbacks of Florida being torn in two with a giant laser running down the center from top to bottom. I don't think Earth was destoyed, but it could have been, right? I am not sure.--Dan 17:21, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I think that was the prototype Xindi weapon from Enterprise, not the Borg. Bryan 17:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unicron

Couldn't Unicron be consitered a planet killer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.78.220 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He's already listed on the page, you may have overlooked it. Bryan 23:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Daleks

The Dalek bombardment of Earth seen in The Parting Of The Ways were clearly shown warping continents. Could we call that Planet Killing technology? I can't see much surviving after that... CSkankRabbit 13:28, 11 October 2006

[edit] Zone of the Enders: The Second Runner

Aumaan is supposed to be capable of destroying the entire solar system. Would this be classed as a Planet Killer?--82.20.221.220 23:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Supreme Commander game

[edit] Obliterators.

What about the Obliterator weapons used by the Honoured Matres and later Omnius in the Dune science fiction novels? They are able to destroy all life on most planets hit by them, the exception being on Dune, where the giant Sandworms survive. Erasmus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.9.254 (talk) 18:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)



This article is completely pointless, please remove as it serves no redeeming value and is of no benifit to anyone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.132.218 (talk) 00:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wow

Just horrible, its like a list with an essay from a really bored guy with too much time on his hands. I'm deleting the parapgraphs of original research, opinion and plot explanations, you want to right it somewhere, go make a website, this is not the place to explain how to theoretically in your opinion destroy a planet. It is not vandalism, putting it back would be vandalism though. Bloody bot thinks its vandalism and isn't a great conversationalist so I posted I message where its said and that should get cleared up, feel free to try and fix the article first, but I don't think its possible unless Star Trek and Star Wars writers got together to make a "How to Destroy the World" book, realistically, this would make a great List article.

[edit] Deletion

Alright, I set it up as a candidate for deletion, following policy, my first time so it might not look quite as clean as others. Reasons, well in the words of the last person to nominate it for this, "Total original research, from premise to execution. Takes a contrived term ("Planet killer") and then sets about thinking up all the times that a planet has ever been destroyed in the entire history of speculative fiction". In addition, several of Keeps in the previous discussion said "but expand and source" or similar, in the months since it has not notably improved, not following the rules of Wikipedia. Keep in mind that as you vote, your supposed to be voting for what best follows the rules of Wikipedia, not how much you like or think the artical can improve. As an alternative, I offer the suggestion that this article would make a much better List article, List of Planet Destroying devices for instance, as the worst part that without doubt cannot possibly be sourced is the bulk of the actual sentences the "To Kill a Planet" section, Death Stars and Vorlon ships can be sourced, even if a unified explanation for how to destroy a planet with all of these terms cannot.

Delete as per above.

The "prod" has been removed... it seems you are looking for a deletion discussion, rather than the "auto-delete after five days if there's no objection" that a "prod" brings. Please indicate if this is the case. --Ckatzchatspy 22:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Ah, right, that would be the right one then, sorry, as I said, I've never deleted an article and to be honest I've gotten to bit rusty on the rules and everything here, but yes I think this should be deleted. No reliable source I've ever heard of groups all methods from various science fiction and fantasy sources for destroying a planet together and attempt to explain them. Lacking reliable sources its original research from a fan boy and has no place here.
Actually I've changed my mind, this could be an okay article. First it would need to become a List of Planet Killers or Planet Destroyers or some such, as that is the part that really has any future. The text on how to theoretically destroy a planet is completely original research from some fansite, completely inappropriate material for wiki here. Sources can also be gathered for a List type, Death Star comes from Star Wars Ep 4, Death Star II comes from 6, Vorlon Planet Killer comes from Babylon 5 season 3 episode ??, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 09:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not Delete

I would not like to see this article deleted. It shows an extrodrinary amount of research in litrature, film and TV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.157.126 (talk) 11:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)