Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centauran (2nd 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 Merge to List of Star Trek races without prejudice for content to be removed altogether if sourcing/notability is not established in a reasonable amount of time.(non-admin closure). Cerejota 06:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Centauran
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is entirely plot summary with no assertion of real-world notability. Does not identify, let alone cite, any of the "novels, sourcebooks, and role-playing games" in which the species "features prominently." --EEMeltonIV 07:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge a brief summary to List of Star Trek races. In fact, the Memory Beta article  might be a better starting place for the merge than the current article, which is way too detailed for a minor race that hasn't appeared in any of the TV series. JulesH 12:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per JulesH, pure plot summary. --Eyrian 18:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect as above, although "Centauran" is in common sf use for anybody hailing from Alpha Centauri. --Dhartung | Talk 19:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Aha! Time for List of notable Centaurans and Centaurans in popular culture. Clarityfiend 21:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You forgot Centaurans (disambiguation). Don't want these guys mixed up with the Centauri. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 16:51, 21 July 2007 (UTC)


 * weak delete - absolutely no sources. Also, OR. Nothing in this article is proving that this is any more than something made up in some guy's head, or something someone made up for a role-playing game one day. Wikipedia's not for something made up in school, nor is it a game sourcebook; this type of article is very close to that line, I think. It has been noted that this is an "official" race within the Star Trek universe, so my vote changes ever so slightly. This article could be kept if it gets properly sourced and trimmed to "official" facts only, as obviously someone's put a lot of work into it and Wikipedia already carries all sorts of "in-universe" material. But the non-official parts of the article must be eliminated, as Wikipedia still isn't for things that people make up. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 16:42, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * comment - also, please read the previous AfD for this article. That suggests that this is a fanfic creation. Why does Wikipedia need articles on anything invented in fanfic? Should we now have an article on Kirk and Spock's gay love affair, which was a famous and important "non-canon" topic? AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 17:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The memory beta article linked above provides details of official star trek novels that contain characters of this race. The suggestion in the previous AFD of this being restricted to fanfic was, apparently, mistaken. JulesH 12:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Besides, we do have an article on Kirk/Spock. JulesH 13:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment regarding the suggestion above that this is not appropriate for the list I suggested merging to, I've left a comment on the talk page of that list requesting feedback from its maintainers. JulesH 13:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Unless sources are provided. Slavlin 17:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Make mention of (merge) in List of Star Trek races, then redirect. Giggy  UCP 07:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge somewhere if and only if it can be sourced; the subject doesn't seem to deserve an article of its own (in terms of notability), so it should be in a bigger article if it's anywhere. The material is currently unsourced, so it really shouldn't be anywhere, but that can (presumably) be fixed as part of a merge, if anyone cares to. SamBC 23:12, 27 July 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.