Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House of Duras


 * 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   Redirect and merge as determined by further discussion. Consensus is that this should not be an article, but more discussion may be needed to decide what to do witht he content. I'm going to editorially redirect it to List of Star Trek characters: A-F. This can be changed if needed per any discussion, and any useful content can be merged from the history.  Sandstein  06:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

House of Duras

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Article has never had references. It is written entirely in-universe and demonstrates zero real-world notability. The Wordsmith Communicate 04:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   Wifione    .......  Leave a message  09:10, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This belongs in a star trek specific wiki. Has been tagged as unsourced for over two years and it seems unlikely it will ever be sourced. Delete per WP:PLOT and WP:GNG. Yoenit (talk) 05:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge per Fayenatic below Yoenit (talk) 09:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with Yoenit, this belongs in Memory Alpha, not here. Not even an assertion of real-world notability as far as I can discern. 28bytes (talk) 06:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Memory Alpha, and selectively merge to lists of Star Trek characters. It is partly sourced and the tag should have been changed to refimprove. I've done some work on this article myself in the past but, sadly (for both the article and the audience), the greatest real-world notability is probably the sisters' cleavages; not sufficient for Wikipedia. Limited content should be copied to the alphabetic lists of Star Trek characters, as several redirects currently point to this page. I'm prepared to do the work. - Fayenatic (talk) 09:00, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea, moving to merge. I was first wondering why there is a fair use picture of the sisters in the article, but now I see some true star trek fan applied WP:HOTTIE. Yoenit (talk) 09:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Checking the Google Books and News links above, we have several trivial mentions outside of fiction itself: ST encyclopedia entry, guide plot summaries, and one piece that may actually be more substantial. As is, the fictional element crosses different shows in the fictional franchise: it's not like we can just merge this to the Enterpise show. Jclemens (talk) 23:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * So, the "House of Duras" reference from the Tampa Tribune in 1996 that Google News shows as Pay-Per-View is just a passing reference in the lead of a puff piece on a ST convention: "If you know the difference between a phaser and a photon torpedo, if you know what the Prime Directive is, if you equate pointed ears with logical thinking, and if you're still scandalized by the behavior of the house of Duras in the Khitomer Massacre, then polish those officer collar studs, gas up the car and set your coordinates for Huntsville, Ala. Star Trek 30: One Weekend on Earth is where you ought to be." This is pretty vexing, actually.  I've never heard of this house, but such an offhanded reference in popular press suggests that there's something more to this.  If we have 3-4 such mentions for such a fictional element, I would really prefer to keep the article intact, even if we merge it into a "Notable Klingons" or "Families spanning Star Trek franchises" sort of list or multi-focal summary article. Jclemens (talk) 23:53, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * But...where is the substantial coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject? A passing mention does not notability make. That's about as passing as it gets. Plus, the article is an in-universe pile of crap with an unnecessary fair use image. There really isn't much to merge, except for brief descriptions of the characters in the character lists. The Wordsmith Communicate 01:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it met notability criteria on the basis of what I've found so far. I'm saying that there's no good place to merge the content, since it's about a family that spans shows. Jclemens (talk) 04:39, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * But your vote is to keep, not merge. That implies that you think the artiicle is notable enough to exist independently. The Wordsmith Communicate 17:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * DELETE non notable.  He  iro  03:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Star Trek characters. They were prominent in the TNG series and major baddies in a feature-length film. Surely they deserve to be mentioned. J I P  &#124; Talk 07:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Zero real world notability, unreferenced, only a few external links as sources. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 15:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Selective, minimal merge to appropriate entries at alpha lists, mostly at List_of_Star_Trek_characters:_A-F. --EEMIV (talk) 00:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Smerge or redirect due to absence of third-party sources that can WP:verify notability. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:12, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In addition to my selective merger proposal above, redirect to Klingon, adding a section there on notable Klingons. As this family featured in multiple series, it will be useful to retain the family tree in Wikipedia, linked to entries in the alphabetic lists of characters, with a very brief text about them. - Fayenatic (talk) 17:43, 8 October 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.