Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earth governments (Star Trek)


 * 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. Most of the keep "votes" fail to establish why it's notable. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Earth governments (Star Trek)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

With due respect to the editors who developed this article, I don't think it is notable. It's completely unsourced except for one reference I added, and details completely minor in-universe trivia of the Star Trek franchise. Mostly it seems to be based on passing remarks about fictional countries made by the characters. I've placed a notice on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Star Trek, and on the talk page of the creator (User:Ritchy). YeshuaD avid  •  Talk  • 23:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: If you have some ideas about how backstory details might be entered into Star Trek other than dialogue references, I am sure that the franchise would love to hear them. This is not a real-world argument, ignoring as it does the realities of the series' production. Anarchangel (talk) 14:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Depiction, for starters? These countries are trivial to Star Trek in general, and that's why these pieces of information come only from throwaway comments. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 19:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Frag This is just trivial. The first section starts out with its supporting evidence two lines from one episode. It's full of synthesis, and I'm having a hard time believing this could ever be verified to secondary sources. If there's really some content people want, I would fold it over to the United Federation of Planets or Starfleet articles. -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 01:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Appropriate summary article. Separate articles on some of these governments could concieivably be justified, but I'm not going to try to do that, because I think combination articles are much much better in cases like this. It's the compromise solution. They can all be sourced to specific places in the primary source. DGG (talk) 02:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * With due respect, I don't think individual articles (e.g. United Kingdom (Star Trek)) would have any chance of existing on Wikipedia. The article is not a compromise solution. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 22:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep As a reasonable spin-out of a huge, notable topic. I don't see any evidence of a search for sources being made. Jclemens (talk) 05:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge/Rename merge to an Earth in Star Trek / Earth (Star Trek) article, and if such an article does not exist, rename the article. Earth in Star Trek is a topic of several non-fiction books, as such is notable. As it is different from Earth in real life, it should be separate. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 06:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I could see a possible merger into Earth in fiction, but it would be better to talk about how Earth is represented within Star Trek, not listing fictional countries, and for that reason I think it should be deleted. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 13:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete This is really original research and belongs on a Star Trek fan's blog, etc. not on WP, although everything about Star Trek is fun. Borock (talk) 14:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Cruft, duplicated information already hosted at Memory Alpha, plus a lot of this is OR (read the entry on the UK!) Ryan 4314   (talk) 15:33, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I still don't get why content is "duplicated," affecting what we should cover, by being covered on an unrelated website somewhere else on the Internet. Of course it's somewhere else as well. We could blow up the encyclopedia without decreasing the sum total of human knowledge. --Kiz o r  20:39, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * My reference to this information being duplicated elsewhere, is an attempt/plea to rationalise this debate to some keepers who may become highly emotional at the prospect of this article being deleted (there's been a lot of Star Trek debates recently, due to the new film) and to show them that this information (for those who care to read it) will not being deleted from human existence, just Wikipedia :) Ryan 4314   (talk) 15:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that makes sense. --Kiz o r  20:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete:. As the opening of the article states; "Most of these Earth governments are only mentioned in passing once or twice, and little is known of their history, geography, and politics, or of their rise and fall". In other words, an awful lot of trivia. I don't even think there's much to merge into other articles to be honest, it's just some plot reiteration. Alastairward (talk) 20:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep A notable aspect of a long running and influential series. If you don't like it, then don't read it, there is no shortage of server space, and you won't find the article unless you go looking for it.   D r e a m Focus  21:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:NOHARM and WP:INDISCRIMINATE for a response to that argument. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 22:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, fancruft, completely unsourced and original research Knowitall (talk) 22:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:ITSCRUFT. 'completely unsourced' is untrue. Show OR, please. Anarchangel (talk) 14:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is unreferenced, the only reference is about the real life United States of Africa proposal. There are some external links, but they do not make the topic notable. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 20:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep — very notable TV series background info. There are plenty of external links that should be references. — Jonathan Bowen (talk)
 * Delete. Fancruft, trivial, not notable. If Fuchs thinks this sources don't exist to sustain this, then they probably don't given how comprehensively he's slaved to improve various Star Trek articles. — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 02:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Minor topic within the fictional universe (the Federation, Starfleet, etc. -- they matter within the series; "Earth governments" are insignificant) and entirely non-notable trivial in the real-world. No citations to third-party sources indicating critical commentary or that they're otherwise even acknowledged by the real world. --EEMIV (talk) 03:48, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Articles about fictional universes are not excluded from Wiki (see Narnia_(world). Not in itself a reason to keep, as per OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, just an argument against this intentional or unintentional wedge holding open the door to the similar, less equivocal and therefore more erroneous comment by Eusebeus below. Anarchangel (talk) 14:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Transwiki/Merge Seems like Memory Alpha could make some use of this content, connecting as it does several of their existing articles.  A limited merge -- to include items such as the quotation from Ron Moore -- to articles such as Earth in fiction and United Federation of Planets would certainly be in order as well.  Powers T 12:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per the above. Unnotable topic from a purely fictional perspective with no assertion of real world significance. Wikipedia is not a fansite. Eusebeus (talk) 15:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not purely fictional; it does include references to production information, including a quotation. Powers T 17:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There's only one reference, about the real-life proposed United States of Africa, which I added. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 23:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There's at least one other one which is not a footnote. Powers T 02:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There are external links, but only one reference. YeshuaD avid   •  Talk  • 17:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, there is at least one other one besides the one you added.  is used to reference the statement about a reference to United Earth being deleted from a two-part episode of DS9.  Powers T 01:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is such a hugely popular topic that I find it credible that 3rd party sources can be found. With the enormous interest, such spinouts are expected.  This doesnt make it a fansite, or fancruft etc.  The world is large place, the cyberworld even bigger. Power.corrupts (talk) 16:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable plotcrap. Doctorfluffy (wanna get fluffed?) 19:34, 26 June 2009 (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.