Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House of Winton


 * 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. Fritzpoll (talk) 08:43, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

House of Winton

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

An in-universed plot summary fork cobbled together from a number of connected science fiction novels about a fictional family. In as much as the fictional family is important to related novels and their plots, they should be mentioned in the articles on the novels. This kind of extensive, original research detail on a fictional family (which is not covered by any reliable sources in a way that would establish notability independent from the novels) is not fit for an encyclopedia intended to be grounded in the real world and cover fiction from a real world perspective. Bali ultimate (talk) 14:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree. Debresser (talk) 14:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:39, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- Jack Merridew 16:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- Jack Merridew 16:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; one might also be able to argue that this is a copyvio; see the source at the bottom; at best it is a heap of original research. Cheers, Jack Merridew
 * Delete, the nominator is correct. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep If it was non-fiction, it would be perfectly valid, so I see no reason why fictional articles should be held to a different standard. The only difference you normally find between fictional and non-fictional articles, is that the fictional ones are often more well known, and are usually more interesting, receiving far more page views.  This is information valid to a series covering many novels, not just a single creation, and there is enough information to warrant its own article.    D r e a m Focus  17:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If it were the House of Windsor, you would be correct; but it's not. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Appropriate combination article. This is the way to go for minor and background characters. The nom. admits there will be reliable sources. Important elements of important fiction merit articles. And all versions of the unfinished WP:FICT admit this if secondary sources are available, as they are here. Not fit for an encyclopedia is classic IDONTLIKEIT, as are almost all the other arguments against characters in this series. The series of nominations follows the classic pattern of first wanting sources, and then if there are sources, not accepting them.  DGG (talk) 18:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see where the nom said that; the RS he's referring to would appear to be ones concerning the books(s) in general. Also, I've seen there are ghits about an actual house (building) with this name (aka Winton House); 'ware. Importance of an element of fiction is establishing be someone independent taking significant note of the element and commenting in significant depth about it as reliable source; I don't see that here. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and/or redirect to List_of_Honorverse_characters. --EEMIV (talk) 18:22, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I've transwikified it to http://honorverse.wikia.com/wiki/House_of_Winton, although editors there are not sure if they want to keep the long list there (interested editors are invited to join the discussion on article's talk). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 19:26, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I love this comment from one of the fans at the Honor wiki had about this article "names were wrong, a number of typos were in it, and some of it seems to be directly copied from The Universe of Honor Harrington." Which is exactly the kind of problem when we get into these pastiche of fiction articles, on topics about which no independent authors have shed any light.Bali ultimate (talk) 19:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete- I agree with the nominator, Jack and Bali ultimate. I'll also add that cobbling together an article like this from various bits and pieces scattered throughout the work of fiction, is beginning to wander into WP:SYNTH territory. Reyk  YO!  22:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I also agree, except to note that Bali and the nom are one and the same. Delete Eusebeus (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to the list of characters and/or the list of organizations. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 05:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge unless someone can add a few independant refs, in case keep. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 15:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per DGG. Edward321 (talk) 14:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Jack Merridew. I'm a great fan, and an accurate (!) article on this on the appropriate Wiki (ie not Wikipedia) is very welcome, but without reliable sources independent of the books, etc, this is inappropriate as a Wikipedia article and indeed does wander into WP:Synthy territory. Dougweller (talk) 07:58, 20 April 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.