Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hello, Sailor


 * 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 no consensus.  Majorly  (o rly?) 17:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Sailor

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable; not closely associated enough with Zork to be merged and redirected. --Yath 00:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * On account that I've seen the phrase in the Jargon File, I'd have to go with a Keep. A reference to certain usage therein has been added, though it's kind of obscure.  --Dennisthe2 00:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep but change emphasis. Phrase is notable, and crops up a fair bit in Victorian literature and subsequent satire; usage in game is not.  Scandrett 01:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep could be a useful reference LazyDaisy 13:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is about one phrase in one computer game. It has no independent sources other than the game. Wikipedia is not a game guide, and should not have articles on every particle of dialogue in every computer game. Fails WP:RS and WP:N. "ILIKEIT' is not a substitute for meeting of the minimum standards for notability and multiple reliable independent sources. If kept, the article should be renamed to show the article relates to the game. If the article were rewritten to be about "a phrase dockside hookers use" it might be appropriate for Wiktionary, but probably not for Wikipedia, which is not a dictionary. Edison 19:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Although the games are certainly notable, bits of trivia from those games don't seem like they belong in their own article.  WP:NOT seems to come into play here. If there's fear that important information about the game universe will be lost, then perhaps something could be mentioned in the Zork section ---  The Bethling (Talk) 00:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This topic may be notable, but there's no evidence the emphasis on its use on the Zork computer game is. There would clearly be an encyclopedic content problem if an article entitled Christianity focused mainly on Ned Flanders; this may be a similar example of picking a minor pop culture allusion to a topic whose principle encyclopedic notability, if any, comes from something else. --Shirahadasha 01:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep —  per Scandrett. Bushcarrot ( Talk·Desk ) 04:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable fancruft. articles like this are just silly. Waitangi 01:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless sourced... Addhoc 12:28, 4 February 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.