Content deleted Content added
reply |
reply. This is NOT an attack |
||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
:::::::::::What article would we redirect to? [[User:Zginder|Zginder]]<sup> ([[User Talk:Zginder|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Zginder|Contrib]])</sup> 23:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
:::::::::::What article would we redirect to? [[User:Zginder|Zginder]]<sup> ([[User Talk:Zginder|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Zginder|Contrib]])</sup> 23:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
::::::::::::Honorverse, List of Rankings, or something. I'm sure we could come up with something reasonable, but again, the young age of the article still strikes me as we should give editors some time to definitively indicate that no sources are to be found before just writing it off. Best, --<font face="Times New Roman">[[User:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles|<span style="color:#009">Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles</span>]]</font><sup>''[[User talk:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles|Tally-ho!]]''</sup> 00:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC) |
::::::::::::Honorverse, List of Rankings, or something. I'm sure we could come up with something reasonable, but again, the young age of the article still strikes me as we should give editors some time to definitively indicate that no sources are to be found before just writing it off. Best, --<font face="Times New Roman">[[User:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles|<span style="color:#009">Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles</span>]]</font><sup>''[[User talk:Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles|Tally-ho!]]''</sup> 00:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
:::::::::::::If an article should not be on Wikipedia why do it matter that that it has only been degrading Wikipedia or a few days instead of years? [[User:Zginder|Zginder]]<sup> ([[User Talk:Zginder|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Zginder|Contrib]])</sup> 00:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:16, 11 March 2008
High Admiral (Honorverse)
- High Admiral (Honorverse) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
A fictional rank whose definition is apparent from name, unsourced, non-notable plot summary. No independent notability (WP:N), does not follow WP:WAF. Written from a in universe perspective. (Was a prod, but has previously been deleted via prod.) Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 12:36, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; non-notable. FWIW, I prod-2'd this. I had not seen the prior article or looked at the log. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge into Grayson Space Navy or related article. Slideshow Bob (talk) 15:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Delete(or Merge) - I loved the books, and I'm pleased to see the series well represented here, but this seems too much like cruft for my tastes. It would work better as a line or two as per Slideshow Bob's suggestion. - Bilby (talk) 15:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)- Comment - I hadn't noticed the age of the article, which was foolish of me: I should have checked. I would normally recommend more time for an article. My problem is that while the position is a central one to the novels (the various High Admirals play significant roles in many of the books), and thus having a mention of the role makes sense, I would have thought that it was the characters who held the role that were really significant. Given this I can see a merge making sense, but I can't see this article growing into much beyond a paragraph or two, unless it cannibalizes (or duplicates) material which would be better placed in the discussions of the characters. And if it can't grow, then maybe it should be part of Grayson Space Navy. - Bilby (talk) 23:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Merge into Grayson Space Navy or related article. Great books.--Doug Weller (talk) 15:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep per notability and verfiability and consistency with a specialized encyclopedia on Honorverse. Delete "rationales" seem to be Wikipedia:ITSCRUFT and Wikipedia:PERNOM. Also, the article is only TWO DAYS old and has been improved since then. We should allow editors more than just two days to build an article, especially because Wikipedia does not have a deadline. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 17:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- The entire article says, "High Admiral is the rank of the Military Commander of the Grayson Space Navy." Well duh, an Admiral is the rank of the Military Commander in navies. The rest of the article talks about Wesley Matthews who could have his own page that could say the same thing. Therefore it is "[a] fictional rank whose definition is apparent from name[.]" Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 18:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- The article is a mere two days old. We should not expect it to have to be more than a stub but two days after its creation. Look at how this article looked when first created versus its Mario current version. It usually takes time for editors to write and revise good articles. Two days is not a reasonable amount of time to allow readers for something that does not have a deadline. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- How are we to find articles that should be deleted if not new page patrol? Random article patrol is to random to be effective and many of the articles that need to be deleted are orphaned, uncategorized, and not marked for clean up. Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 18:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- New page patrol is for hoaxes, personal attacks, and copy vios, or otherwise nonsense articles. An article that is a stub and is not an obvious hoax, not a copy vio, not a personal attack deserves time to possible expand. There is no "need" to delete this particular article. We are here to write a comprehensive encyclopedia, not find articles to delete. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Let's see. On March 8th, the same person created new pages for six different classes of ships from the Honorverse. And with comments such as 'We can assume', and '(Note: At this time, the SLN should be considered 2nd class. They don't have anywhere near the firepower represented by a pod-laying ship. This could be subject to change if the SLN woke up and smelled the proverbial coffee.)' I can't recall, but I think there are some more classes. And all the planets. Etc. I think I have every book, but this is getting ridiculous.--Doug Weller (talk) 18:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- That reads more like a case of Wikipedia:SOFIXIT than AfD, though. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- They are all already covered in various other articles. If this isn't, it should be.--Doug Weller (talk) 18:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Then, that would mean that we would merge and redirect the article without deleting it. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 19:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- No, then, the article has no usable information and should be deleted. Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 20:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I see no rationale for an outright deletion in this case, i.e. a decsive decision that could benefit the project. Regards, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 22:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- What article would we redirect to? Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 23:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Honorverse, List of Rankings, or something. I'm sure we could come up with something reasonable, but again, the young age of the article still strikes me as we should give editors some time to definitively indicate that no sources are to be found before just writing it off. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 00:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- What article would we redirect to? Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 23:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I see no rationale for an outright deletion in this case, i.e. a decsive decision that could benefit the project. Regards, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 22:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- No, then, the article has no usable information and should be deleted. Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 20:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Then, that would mean that we would merge and redirect the article without deleting it. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 19:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- They are all already covered in various other articles. If this isn't, it should be.--Doug Weller (talk) 18:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- That reads more like a case of Wikipedia:SOFIXIT than AfD, though. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Let's see. On March 8th, the same person created new pages for six different classes of ships from the Honorverse. And with comments such as 'We can assume', and '(Note: At this time, the SLN should be considered 2nd class. They don't have anywhere near the firepower represented by a pod-laying ship. This could be subject to change if the SLN woke up and smelled the proverbial coffee.)' I can't recall, but I think there are some more classes. And all the planets. Etc. I think I have every book, but this is getting ridiculous.--Doug Weller (talk) 18:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- New page patrol is for hoaxes, personal attacks, and copy vios, or otherwise nonsense articles. An article that is a stub and is not an obvious hoax, not a copy vio, not a personal attack deserves time to possible expand. There is no "need" to delete this particular article. We are here to write a comprehensive encyclopedia, not find articles to delete. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- How are we to find articles that should be deleted if not new page patrol? Random article patrol is to random to be effective and many of the articles that need to be deleted are orphaned, uncategorized, and not marked for clean up. Zginder (talk) (Contrib) 18:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- The article is a mere two days old. We should not expect it to have to be more than a stub but two days after its creation. Look at how this article looked when first created versus its Mario current version. It usually takes time for editors to write and revise good articles. Two days is not a reasonable amount of time to allow readers for something that does not have a deadline. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)