Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cross generation ship


 * 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. henrik • talk  08:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Cross generation ship

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This is a non-notable topic with the article apparently consisting of the speculations of the main contributors from the 11th of May 2004. There are no references and I found no reliable sources. Fartherred (talk) 00:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Unreferenced, and none can be found with a search.  A pretty clear case of WP:OR.  Rorshacma (talk) 00:32, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. It's so obscure and ORy, I can't even think of any science fiction stories that employ the concept. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't remember ever reading of this scheme, which doesn't work because of the velocity matching requirements. There have been a few stories where a society has found and "rescued" a multi-generation ship's crew but that's not the proposal here. htom (talk) 04:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not finding coverage of this topic in reliable sources whatsoever. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:OR. Unreferenced, and no references can be found with a search. -- 202.124.74.17 (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete A Cross-generation by its definition is the same thing as a Generation Ship as its occupants will never reach the destination. And the term cross-generation doesn't merit a redirect as it is already obscure. The merger proposal has not been responded to on the talk page of Generation Ship, but the current article warrants delete to me.ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * delete per nom and WP:OR. ("ORy"? Really? Shouldn't it be "ORly"? :D )- UtherSRG (talk) 10:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ORy, Original Researchy, not researchly. ;) htom (talk) 16:12, 29 February 2012 (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.