Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nial Declann

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 delete. Based on the strength of the arguments, and that no one has any idea where to merge or even redirect these articles. Please try to be more specific and thoughtful when suggesting a merge. Mangojuicetalk 03:32, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nial Declann

Nial Declann (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

These are all fascinating characters, but the subjects do not meet WP:FICT. Additionally, the articles do not pass WP:WAF. EEMeltonIV 20:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Also nominating

Merge all into the works they appear. A lot of these in-universe subarticles and lists can be translated to scattered plot summary; heck, most of the novels and games lack plot summaries, where this information belongs. Thus, merging seems a tangible solution over deletion; some of this info can be used in plot summaries. — Deckiller 02:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment -- Many of these are mentioned only in a Star Wars Insider article or some such identifying the various grand admirals; they don't appear in any book or game. The References section for most of them list a handful of references/RPG source books that don't have their own article to merge or redirect to. Only two or three identify actual stories that have/might one day have an article into which the material can be merged. As with bits like the TIE/D and TIE mauler, I'd be happy for those grand admirals who've shown up somewhere to redirect to the actual work -- but the lingering ones that appeared just in the Insider or Essential Characters book should probably be axed. --EEMeltonIV 20:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge - Not enough real world notability for these to stand on their own Corpx 04:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Question - Any notion as to what they should be merged into? --EEMeltonIV 20:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - re. possible merge into that List of minor... -- I suspect most "List of minor..."s probably likewise do not meet WP:FICT. --EEMeltonIV 20:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all as per nom clearly does not pass WP:FICT Harlowraman 03:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge i think its only fair that they are merged and merged well, there's some go info there. Although they arent notable the info can be written in elsewhere --₵hildzÿ Δ Tãlk 19:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Question - "the info can be written in elsewhere" - Ideas where? --EEMeltonIV 20:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all. They don't meet WP:FICT, and any useful information they might contain will eventually make its way into the master articles on the games/books/etc. through organic article growth. --Darkwind (talk) 23:32, 20 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.