Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astropolis

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS.

The article was changed significantly on February 7. Only one delete vote was given after that point. dbenbenn | talk 16:11, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Astropolis
In the current state the article is acceptable, and IMO the current VfD no longer applicable. Therefore I suggest to remove the vfd tag. Mikkalai 02:34, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * neologism (? at least I don't remember such in Star Wars, mentioned in the article), original research. Mikkalai 07:00, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep; vote changed after major rework. Mikkalai 17:24, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't see any evidence of this term being any sort of common usage, even among scifi fans. Google mostly returned hits related to some sort of French techno festival of the same name. Katefan0 20:09, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Space station, nothing here worth merging. Megan1967 01:34, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable neologism, unless the French techno festival is notable enough to replace this article. --Deathphoenix 01:41, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism, original research. JoaoRicardo 04:57, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. A classic case for cleanup. Astropolis is hardly a neologism, it appears in the title of Eugene Jolas' Secession in Astropolis in 1929 for example. Probably this page should become a disambiguation, the term is so heavily used for so many things, by so many authors - including the French techno music festival of course. Andrewa 17:43, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * not neologism? A vocabulary entry, please. I doesn't matter that google gives 10,000 hits for the word. The only "cleanup" for the article is to ""delete". If one wants to write about French festival or something real, he is welcome. Even if you turn this article into a disambig, something should be done with the current content, other than to sweep the problem with it under the carpet. Just think that you are voting for the article Astropolis (city), not for Astropolis (disambiguation). Mikkalai 20:04, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't want a fight, IMO whether we keep this is not very important, but I think I must reply as the above is full of important misapprehensions. No, we are voting here for the article Astropolis. This, rather than Astropolis (disambiguation), is the best title for a disambiguation page if there's no clear winner for the unqualified title, as seems to be the case, but again that's not terribly important and either will do IMO. No, it's not a neologism, and yes, more than 10,000 Google hits do require some explanation, what is yours? No, we don't delete articles to clean up the history, even in the case of copyvios (unless asked by the copyright holder), and no, editing an article to improve it isn't sweeping a problem under the carpet, and that's a basic principle underlying many of our policies. No change of vote. Andrewa 20:32, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * So, according to your logic, if someone writes in, say, Nick article, that "Nick is the guy with the longest penis in Cupertino, CA" we shall keep the article? Even if the only possible cleanup is blanking? Only because the word exists? Mikkalai 21:37, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: No, I would not suport that argument, nor do I think it is a valid parallel to the current discussion. But I would argue that, if someone were to suggest that Nick was a neologism, then their logic was faulty. Wouldn't you? Andrewa 05:03, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, Andrewa gives 25,600 googlehits. let's have an article, then. BTW, is this you? Mikkalai 21:43, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: No, and no. There is another explanation for these Google hits, and that is that Andrewa is a standard tie-breaker when several people called Andrew all want a userid based on their Christian names, on the same system. (That's not rocket science surely.) All I was asking for was a similar explanation, I still think one is required to cover a gaping hole in the logic above, and it's not obvious to me what it might be. Andrewa 05:03, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just to clarify my above vote, I think the current contents, although they need a lot of work, do contain some useful material. That is why it would be useful to keep this article as the basis of something better. Andrewa 20:32, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 90% of the article was speculation. Deleted. Of the remaining 3 sentences, if you really want it, you must describe where and this exqactly term was used in the scifi Star Wars and babylon 5. I don't recall it used there. I admit, I didn't learn them by heart, but google search gives zero relevant pages, which is suspicious, in view of huge fandom. Mikkalai 21:37, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: OK, I've now had a go at making it a disambiguation. No change of vote. Andrewa 10:21, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I like the idea of a disambig page, but I'm still worried it is not a notable enough concept to warrant it. Besides the already cited work, which other science fiction works use the term astropolis? JoaoRicardo 02:26, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Omar Filini 07:15, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.