Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Defense Initiative


 * 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. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  03:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Global Defense Initiative
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I'm nominating this article for deletion because there are no independent sources to verify notability. Fails verifiability and notability policy that requires third-party sources. The article is merely a reprint of data from instruction manuals and gameguides from commercial partners. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:14, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

It might even be a good idea to redirect the remaining factions to that faction page, as was planned some time ago. --Izno (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Command & Conquer: Tiberian series. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 06:14, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Fictional universes will have limited third party sourcing for the most part, unless it's player or reviewer generated. Most information on the in-universe details will be provided by the developers. As far as notability goes, the entire Command & Conquer series is notable beyond measure. That said, I would support a Merge into Command & Conquer: Tiberian series, however I'm concerned about possible WP:WEIGHT issues that might arise, as GDI and NOD are significant elements of the Command & Conquer universe. Torinir ( Ding my phone   My support calls   E-Support Options  ) 07:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  Nifboy (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - The reasoning in the AfD results in a "rewrite-tag" for me. But it doesn't satisfy the deletion. Notability is the same as e.g. Cobra Command. Lajbi  Holla @ me  •  CP  23:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * On what basis? There are no appropriate sources that would allow us to re-write the article so that it meets guidelines. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment (and possible !vote) - There is a list article for all CnC factions at Factions of Command & Conquer, which I suggest would be a suitable place to redirect the article to. The paragraph there suitably covers the article on the GDI in a manner congruent with our guideline on writing about fiction. If we say that about half of Global Defense Initiative is plot related (a good estimate), that material is covered in our articles on the individual games. The other half is essentially game guide information.
 * Procedural keep The nominator has not specified any reasons why this information should be removed completely. I personally think it's notable enough to warrant its own article, but it undoubtedly is notable enough to be included in this encyclopedia, so the question is only whether to keep this is a separate article or to merge it someplace else - which is not a question for AFD. Regards  So Why  18:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment from nominator: a lack of notability is always a reasonable basis for deletion. However, I would support a merge if that would help to avoid a "no consensus" closure. It looks like all but Lajbi have mentioned merging as a possible compromise. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ummm... The entire Command and Conquer series is notable, and GDI is a primary protagonist organization within the series (being the primary protagonist organization in 5 of the games in the series). Lacking notability? Not a chance. Torinir ( Ding my phone   My support calls   E-Support Options  ) 02:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems to be lacking in something which establishes notability: reliable secondary sourcing. Even so, as I noted above, the article is too much about the plot, while the rest of the information is quite game guidey. Factions of Command & Conquer covers the GDI suitably. --Izno (talk) 02:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's notable, then someone should be able to WP:PROVEIT. Right now there's nothing to WP:verify notability which is a problem. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per SoWhy -- I agree that it's notable enough for this encyclopedia, and a merge is a possible alternative (though AfD isn't the place to discuss such a proposal).  Swarm   X 01:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep sufficiently notable plot element for a separate article--and, btw,  we can and do discuss whether to merge here.    DGG ( talk ) 00:59, 7 November 2010 (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.