Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human possession in science fiction


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Sufficient improvements in the article have been made and sources introduced to sufficiently support notability of the topic. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 07:23, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Human possession in science fiction

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be original research. Only link is to wikia.com which is not a reliable source. While the concept may or may not be notable, the article currently is unacceptable. Safiel (talk) 07:17, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:21, 19 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: and, the article was created in good faith by . Why is deletion your first recourse? It is a plausible science fiction theme to cover. Nicole can be given feedback to find reliable sources about this topic. Would you be willing to retract your deletion proposal for the time being and give the editor time to write a more suitable article? Deletion can be revisited later if the article does not improve. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 22:06, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I began looking for sources and found this right away. Good faith needs to be assumed in others' effort to create content. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 22:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I should note the fact that an article was created in good faith is irrelevant to this discussion. Editors frequently create articles in the best of faith that turn out to fall short of guidelines. I would also note that the AfD process takes, at a minimum, seven days, which is more than enough time to locate and add sources to document the notability of the article, which would result in the article being kept. Get the article into decent shape and I will have no problem with it being kept. This discussion may help by attracting the attention of third party editors who may improve the article. I will leave this up at least a couple of more days. If things are looking better (and assuming no editor makes a delete argument in the interim), I will consider withdrawing this. Safiel (talk) 05:21, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * , it is actually relevant. WP:BITE says, "Avoid deleting newly created articles, as inexperienced authors might still be working on them or trying to figure something out." Also, WP:BEFORE says, "If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page [or] with the main contributors." You could have given feedback to the editor that they need to verify the topic with reliable sources. To put it up for deletion right away is to set the clock and put their feet to the fire unnecessarily. I can provide Nicole some feedback, but I am saying it was not assuming good faith for deletion to be the first option. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 12:20, 20 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Information about each science fiction series mentioned can be found on its main page showing who their enemy or main enemy was. If that's not enough, simply by using Google News for any science fiction series mentioned and the name of the thing controlling humans, you can find things.   D r e a m Focus  00:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep (and it's not because there's a slug on my back). It's discussed in books. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:34, 21 November 2015 (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.