Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Battlestar Galactica objects


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

List of Battlestar Galactica objects

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced original research WP:fancruft list that will not interest anybody other than the tiniest minority of fans (if there's any remaining). Editors needs to be reminded that this is Wikipedia, not BSG Wiki Cylon B (talk) 14:18, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as frakingly awful fancruft. It's just a small, random selection of objects, and one of them (CBDR) isn't even that. Instrumentation? Instrumentation!?! Clarityfiend (talk) 08:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep No valid reason for deletion articulated; no reason this couldn't be sourced and/or cleaned up. It's a list, not a specific object, so notability is that much easier to demonstrate. Jclemens (talk) 01:32, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Seriously, do you see this list any use to anybody other than the tiniest minority of hardcore fans. Cleanup? You mean purge this list about TV series plot devices? Don't tell me you're going to use other Wikipedia articles as sources. Cylon B (talk) 01:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sourced how? Nobody is discussing these things in depth. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:27, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Delete - unsourced hubris. None of the items have any reliable sourcing nor does it indicate any notability. Karst (talk) 12:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - Just a whole lot of fancruft and original research on a bunch of extremely minor fictional objects. No sources, and based on the results of some searches, none are forthcoming.  64.183.45.226 (talk) 20:04, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per above reasons. Aoba47 (talk) 23:31, 6 January 2017 (UTC)


 * By following the 'books' link in any of the five elements I've pulled from the list, you can see that each has multiple, independent reliable sources--contra all of the opinions posted above. There's certainly room for sourcing and editing (yes, Instrumentation and CBDR are truly stupid entries), but the list is an alternative to small articles on each of these other topics, which individually meet the WP:GNG, and thus the list does. Jclemens (talk) 06:26, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the problem isn't whether there are sources about each, but whether there are sources for the group. There are sources which treat the characters, episodes, etc. as a group, but are there sources about the "objects" in the series (not individual objects)? &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 17:46, 8 January 2017 (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.