Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/InVitro

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. -Splash 01:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

InVitro
This appears to be fiction, but it doesn't say so, and even using Google I can't figure out where it comes from. So  delete . Gdr 10:39:29, 2005-08-18 (UTC)
 * Comment. Numerous google references suggest that that this comes from Space: Above and Beyond. I don't know the show, so I don't know how important or crufty this is. ManoaChild 10:56, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but Cleanup. Seems to be a major element of Space: Above and Beyond. I've added a little bit to the introduction of the article, to give it a bit of context, but someone who knows the show needs to do more. ManoaChild 11:12, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Cruft. Merge anything not already duplicated on Space: Above and Beyond, redirect to in vitro as a viable typo, and put a dab on that page explaining "InVitro is also the name of tank-bred humans in Space: Above and Beyond". Proto t c 12:07, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's good now that it's mentioned to be about a fictional subject. There are many articles about fictional races on wikipedia, so it's legitimacy should not be in question. -- Judson 12:20, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, I retract my "delete" vote. Gdr 15:16:02, 2005-08-18 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obviously. Trollderella 18:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. And I strongly disagree with "merge" by classifying this as "crufty", both within the series and in general context. Importance within the series is evident by considering the article Chigs, and numerous references in Space: Above and Beyond, and also the series itself (e.g. episodes 1.01, 1.04, 1.05, 1.07, 1.13, 1.18). Categories/listing also show clearly that the asserted classification as "crufty" in the general Wikipedia context is inappropriate and poses a double standard: Fictional character, Category:Fictional species, Category:Fictional alien species, Category:Fictional clones, and many others --Ylai 05:08, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Currently a well-fleshed out article, that's no more cruft then many other articles in Wikipedia.--Prosfilaes 07:56, 23 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.