Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fictional resistance movements and groups


 * 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   keep. While the keeps are on the weaker side of policy based comments, Colonel Warden rewrote the article soon after it was relisted, and more than enough time passed to look at the rewritten version, and none of the editors advocating for deletion commented on it, thus the result. Secret account 02:30, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Fictional resistance movements and groups

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

In-universe fancruft, no criteria for inclusion. No notability out of universe. Unsourced since forever. I forgot I prodded this and somehow ended up prodding it twice, but the prod template didn't trigger. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 06:10, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep but prune and rename to List of fictional resistance movements and groups There are problems with this article, like the lack of sourcing, but a number of the entries have either Wikipedia articles (Maquis (Star Trek), Order of the Phoenix (organisation), Rebel Alliance, Brotherhood of Mutants, Resistance (V)) or sections in articles (AVALANCHE) so you could just about make this into a valid list. It might be possible to expand it, e.g. using the relevant TV Tropes article - and yes this article is itself a bit TV Tropes-y, but it could still be a valid topic. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 18:01, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Nominator fails to articulate a poicy-based deletion reason, since the above keep !voter notices that there are sources that sources for the various entries are available on Wikipedia. Failing that, if any of the named organizations proves to be sourced but non-notable, the list should be retained as a merge target.  Oh, and as noted above, if the list were restricted to notable entries, the inclusion criterion is solved *poof* like magic: normal editing, no deletion required. Jclemens (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTPLOT and WP:OR. The article focuses entirely on in-universe aspects of the topic. The article does not cite any reliable sources and appears to constitute original research into the topic. --Odie5533 (talk) 15:23, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Overly broad list, lacking a narrowly defined topic, without any notability of the subject matter. This pulls random groups together from across the entire realm of fiction and publishes them in a single article due to the trivial fact that they are "resistance movements". Needs a much narrower scope to be an encyclopedic article. Also, the broad topic hasn't been written about in reliable, third-party sources. If nobody else talks about this, then it is not our place to do so.  Them From  Space  22:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete- I agree with the nominator and the other two delete votes. The article has no solid inclusion criteria, and its current content is unsourced fan speculation. Reyk  YO!  00:35, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The basic criterion is that there be an article on WP, and then that the the group be highly significant in the work in question. This is not vague, because whether something is significant enough to be listed is always a matter of judgement, and can be discussed on the talk page, since the basic source for the content of a work is the work itself. But the list of groups and people should be separated; that this needs to be done is a reason to do so, not a reason to delete. . The real problem with this article is that there are a few dozen more to add from famous works in various genres. If the work is famous enough, there will also be secondary sources, as every article/book on the work will mention them if significant. Certainly this can be done for  at least #4, 5,   14, and 15.    DGG ( talk ) 00:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)




 *  Delete  The basic problem here is that there's no external source in which to ground the treatment as required by WP:LISTN. At the moment, it's a compilation of examples from popular SF but these examples will not be well-supported by sources.  The sources that exist will tend to focus more upon fictional treatments of historical resistance groups: Christians in early Rome; Saxons after the Norman conquest; the French resistance to the Nazis; &c.  As an example, see Encyclopedia of Slave Resistance and Rebellion which references numerous fictional works such as Ben-Hur, Birth of a Nation, The Color Purple.  And if you want to be recentist, then there's Django Unchained to add to the list.  But if we toss out all the unsourced pop-SF and put in lots of entries about resistance to American oppression, the article becomes a political battleground for which it would need a stronger foundation.  Back to the drawing board.  Warden (talk) 11:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have rewritten it and, as a better structure is provided, the topic seems to be developing well. It should be given more time per WP:IMPERFECT and WP:PRESERVE. Warden (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep All those things listed have their own articles, so the list is useful for navigation.  D r e a m Focus  15:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep A sound topic and suitable more for expansion than deletion. Peridon (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Neutral Weak keep - but I suggest something be added to the lede to clarify that it is a list of notable fictional groups. Otherwise every non-notable fictional group from every movie or book is going to be redlinked into the article. What about the Liberation Army of Tecala from Proof of Life? What about the Liberation Army from Rave Master? What about the Ecumenical Liberation Army from the film Network? Or the Ulster Liberation Army from Patriot Games? Do we include the People's Front of Judea or the Judaean People's Front? You see where I'm going with this, right? Stalwart 111  01:39, 23 February 2013 (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.