Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armed Forces of the Federated Suns (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Consensus is to delete as out of project scope. Closing as "merge" would not be helpful given that the page has had a "mergeto" tag since 2007 and no merger has occurred. But the page can be userfied onm request for merge or transwiki if somebody really, actually wants to do that.  Sandstein  06:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Armed Forces of the Federated Suns

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Hy there, I'm hereby proposing the article Armed Forces of the Federated Suns for deletion. I guess that this is the 3rd deletion proposal (I might be mistaken however). The first proposal seems to have ended in a "merge and then delete" result but this was not carried out. I personally made a speedy delete proposal (at the time I had not noticed the first proposal) but another user believes that "merge and turn into a redirect" is a better solution.

The subject itself is IMHO simply not notable enough to warrant an article for itself. It's a rather too detailed description of a fictional military of a fictional nation in a fictional universe. In the end we have to ask ourselves: is the subject interesting/worthy to require an article? IMHO it simply isn't but notice that this is only my personal opinion upon this matter. Another thing: if the verdict of this discussion is yet another merge then by all means: MAKE SURE that the work gets done this time. I'm not going to do it. I don't know how to do it in the 1st place (make a merge and preserving the history) and I honestly believe that the information of this article is way too specialized (not worthy enough). Thanks for your attention. Flamarande (talk) 12:51, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Created in 2005, 'nuff said. Wikipedia is gradually getting away from being the encyclopedia of fantasy worlds as entertainment wikis take over.  I think that most of the BattleTech articles can migrate at FTL speed to their own universe (in this case the BattleTech wiki), though some of the core articles have their own real world notability.  Mandsford 16:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * So you mean Transwiki, then? Jclemens (talk) 00:11, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't. I've always understood transwiki to refer to moving something to another location within the service; in this case, something one reaches from the Wikipedia main page-- Wikinews, Wiktionary, or one of those other things nobody ever looks at.  The entertainment wikis on wikia.com are advertiser-supported and exist separately.  More importantly, the entire article can be hosted over there without someone trying to cut it way down so that it can be merged somewhere and, someone can link it from one of the remaining Battletech articles.  Mandsford 13:14, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Transwikis to Wikia are logged at WP:TRANSWIKI, so I think your understanding is more restrictive than actual practice. Jclemens (talk) 22:46, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. -- JN 466  19:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - In my opinion, fictional universe descriptions such as this have little place in a serious encyclopedia. Carrite (talk) 21:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge Per WP:FICT, WP:AVOIDSPLIT, and WP:ATD. It can certainly be trimmed in the merge, but there's simply no reason given to delete it.  The nominator has failed to lift a finger to fix anything, even given a previous consensus to merge, which I do not find in an AfD under this title.  If there's a previous consensus to merge, and the nominator is asking for a merge, why are we even here at AfD in the first place?  Apparently to allow people to spout off non-policy based WP:IDONTLIKEIT reasons. Jclemens (talk) 00:11, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The nominator hasn't written anything that even suggests that he or she is asking for a merge. Mandsford 13:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not obliged to improve an article about a subject which I believe shouldn't be in Wikipedia in the first place. The history of the article (and its talkpage) indicate that there is a consensus to merge the article into Federated Suns. However it was never carried out for unclear reasons (laziness, disinterest, or "no one was willing to take the proper steps"?). In my personal opinion this article shouldn't be merged; it should be deleted but I hope that if the result is another 'merge' the work gets done this time. I gave my reasons for deletion above ("simply not notable enough to warrant an article for itself. It's a rather too detailed description of a fictional military of a fictional nation in a fictional universe") and I can only wonder how you failed to notice them. Notice that these are perfectly valid reasons (WP:Notability and WP:NOTMANUAL) and that you're certainly free to have a different opinion upon this matter. Flamarande (talk) 13:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * This is a volunteer project, so you're not obligated to do anything. The proper and polite thing to do is to go ahead and implement the consensus to merge--but the project tolerates those who would rather write tons of deletion rationales than actually lift a finger to help.  In my personal opinion, that should not be tolerated. Jclemens (talk) 22:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It also tolerates those who would prefer tell other people "so fix it" rather than to fix anything themselves, although you may have started merging information from this page to another article. Please feel free to continue. Mandsford 16:01, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete 'Nuff Said.Ukguy4thewin (talk) 00:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep/Merge As a fan of Battletech, information gleamed here is intesting. At the same time, it is more detailed than it ought to be. Perhaps the BattletechWiki would be a better place -- Rockstone  talk to me!   15:31, 21 March 2011 (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.