Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SPI Armor
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. MastCell Talk 17:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] SPI Armor
fictional technology/body armour - no sigificant real-world impact, it's just an invisibility suit - 100s exist in fiction - needs a line in the revelent article. Delete as per WP:NOT. Fredrick day 09:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect. Real world impact isn't a requirement. Having this as a separate article, though, appears to violate WP:FICT. I'd suggest shortening the text and merging and redirecting it into a List of Halo weapons [sic], an article on the technology in the game, or simply the novel it appears in. The last one clearly exists, so that's probably the best merge target. - Mgm|(talk) 11:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment shortening the content and creating a List of Halo weapons with all the similar articles seems like a good idea. -- lucasbfr talk 13:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- I could be wrong but I *think* that the current move is to delete articles like List of Halo Weapons and I think that article (or something very similar) did exist in the past and was deleted. --Fredrick day 13:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of weapons in Halo 2 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of weapons in Halo: Combat Evolved Both delete. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 19:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I could be wrong but I *think* that the current move is to delete articles like List of Halo Weapons and I think that article (or something very similar) did exist in the past and was deleted. --Fredrick day 13:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Articles on fictional topics are only supposed to be made when there are sources detailing real world information. These types of sources are not presented here, and are unlikely to be found. Jay32183 22:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep* it's part of a series. Are we going through every category for (what we think are) obscure stories and deleting everything we don't care about? -Rebent 03:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Are we going to try and delete everything that does not match policy? yep. (well no actually there is too much of it but we can at least try to keep a lid on it) --Fredrick day 08:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:N's "multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic" criteria. Even a list of them would get deleted per Night Gyr's examples. --maclean 06:10, 11 May 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.
