Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jefferies tube


 * 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.

Withdrawing my own nom; no delete !votes. Will address on article talk page. --EEMIV (talk) 15:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Jefferies tube

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

Non-notable bit of plot summary and trivia without a worthwhile merge/redirect target. Real-world uses are trivial and passing mentions -- claim about Air Force use uncited for almost two years. Great material for Memory Alpha, inappropriate here. --EEMIV (talk) 11:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Matt Jefferies as it shows his effect on the franchise.- Mgm|(talk) 12:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That's actually a good idea; I withdraw the nomination and I'll propose the merge on the talk page. If there's objection, I'll just re-open AfD to get it done. Thanks! --EEMIV (talk) 13:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, this actually is appropriate for Wikipedia. Suggesting it's only appropriate on a for-profit wiki founded by Jimbo Wales, however, is not. This article has been here over 6 1/2 years. Suddenly this article is inappropriate for Wikipedia? You made edits to this article in May and October 2007 and you didn't nominate this for deletion then. Why now? Are you a Wikia employee? Are you thinking "Wouldn't it be great if when someone did a Google search for 'jefferies tube' and clicks I'm Feeling Lucky they end up at Wikia and not Wikpedia?" Jefferies tubes are notable within Stak Trek. You could cite The Star Trek Encyclopdia. Doesn't the fact that Scott Adams and J. D. Frazer have made references to Jefferies Tubes mean that third parties have found them worthy of notice? --Pixelface (talk) 12:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm reminded of that scene in Firefly: "My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." No, I'm not part of the latest cabal, trying to direct traffic to Wikia. Yes, I've edited this page before -- and in my time at Wikipedia, I've actually come to better understand our policies on fictional topics; I also, after all, created most of this bag of cruft. An article's duration at Wikipedia is irrelevant, as it's an involving community with evolving standards for inclusion and whatnot -- and, frankly, lots of stuff just sits around and gets overlooked. And allusions in a couple of comics does not come anywhere close to meeting standard that fictional topics be subject to significant, third-party critical response. --EEMIV (talk) 13:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Less trivial than many other "in universe" topics. A merge to Matt Jefferies might also be a good thing. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:00, 26 November 2008 (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.