Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional appearances of SR-71 Blackbird


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 03:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

List of fictional appearances of SR-71 Blackbird

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

Split off from SR-71 Blackbird in an attempt to protect the latter from pop culture trivia, but the argument was generally over whether such a list should be included at all. WP:PROD was refused. Mangoe (talk) 17:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC) Merge per Jclemens. KMFDM FAN (talk!) 21:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Merge per WP:IPC--there's really not a whole lot here, but a sourced popular culture appearance is appropriate in the main article. Jclemens (talk) 17:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * merge Not enough to split at this point.DGG (talk) 22:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete but hold on till end of August: Futher information Here and here please wait until at least to the end of August for the heat to die down. It received very positive influence that the addition of not notable materials are greatly reduced in number in the main article.  And no merges please, everyone will delete the cruft from the main page including me. MythSearchertalk 08:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - if it isn't of sufficient quality for the main article, then it won't stand on its own either. That the main article can't be protected from fancruft is no reason to try and ignore the issue by hiving it off elsewhere. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:51, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment, Like I said, it is not a place for hiving it off somewhere else, it is used to stop the 4~5 times per day addition of such material to the main article(in which the link above provided sufficient edit history to prove this point) just for the period of that specific movie's heat to die down. Or an admin can help semi-protect the main article for like 3 months from the beginning(also till end of August).  No one from the main article, including me wanted this article, but it surely showed promising effect on what we hope to eliminate.(there are only a total of 2 addition of said unwanted material to the main article after the page was created, and we know the heat is dying down since the movie was aired for quite some time now and hopefully by the end of August, the addition of such material would be much more reasonable like before and people at the main article could reasonably rv such edits in reasonable amount per week.) MythSearchertalk 14:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't like the idea of lightning-rod articles. It's not playing straight. Pseudomonas(talk) 19:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply, if you are fine with reverting the article 5 times a day, be my guest. Never was this article meant to stay up for long, it is only used for a certain period where a pop culture item will be added over and over due to publicity.  Choose the lesser of the two evils, and I see that not until this article was created to stop the revert spree(against bunch of anons that probably made some over their 3RR limit and luckily anons usually don't know how to report), people at the main article got time to do some actual discussion and editing to improve the article. MythSearchertalk 01:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lists of X in fiction/popular culture are breeding grounds for subjective inclusion, original research, and general cruftiness, for almost all values of X. Pseudomonas(talk) 19:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply This is always true, yet dire times need dire solutions. I see that not much people actually try to go through the editing history in which I have listed in the above linked talk page.  And most involved here did not even involve in the 5 times/day removal of cruft.  Easier said than done, talking about deleting this article is simple, but actually protecting the main article needs work, not talk.  MythSearchertalk 01:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Ok, lets walk through this for a minute. Starting with the MilMos, which states "'In popular culture' sections should be avoided unless the subject has had a well-cited and notable impact on popular culture", and working backwards, we do arrive at the conclusion that the SR-71 has had notable appearances in fiction. This includes alternative history, as well as real to life appearances. Its a plane that holds several Guinness records for speed and was and remains influential in the west, particularly among NATO countries and especially in the United States. Now I grant that the list is rather crufty, but if you are all willing to let me have 24 hours to work on the section I do believe that the material here can be recycled into a paragraph or two and added to the SR-71 article like what appears over on the page Iowa class battleship. That should solve the problem of what to do with the article and how to porperly address pop-culture related information for the SR-71. TomStar81 (Talk &bull; Some say ¥€$, I say NO) 06:42, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment This sounds great, I will inform the main article and see if they like the idea or not. Since most of them hated any pop culture section because it normally attracts random passerbys adding their own favourites, and I kinda see that coming even if a well sourced and well written section is created. MythSearchertalk 07:40, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I would be interested in Tom's rewrite but what currently exists in this fiction article isn't worth carrying forth to the main article. I'm currently leaning in the delete - no merge direction but will remain open-minded pending the rewrite. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  ((⊕)) 15:53, 29 July 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.