Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional extraterrestrials by form


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 13:11, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

List of fictional extraterrestrials by form

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced, original research, no apparent notability of the topic (form of fictional aliens). Compare Articles for deletion/List of mammalian alien species (2nd nomination).  Sandstein  11:37, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 13:52, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 13:52, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Pure unreferenced list cruft that groups aliens by subjective criteria.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:15, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. The PROD for List of mammalian aliens expires soon. w umbolo   ^^^  21:29, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep It passes WP:LISTN, being covered in sources such as Barlowe's Guide to Extraterrestrials. There's plenty of blue-links and, as this is the master list, it should be the main focus of future development of this notable topic.  It parallels the List of fictional extraterrestrials and so maybe there's some scope for merger.  As there's lots of material, there are plenty of alternatives to deletion which it is our policy to prefer. Andrew D. (talk) 10:17, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect I'm of the opinion that the content of this list should be killed with fire, but, yeah, it could theoretically be a useful redirect for navigational purposes. It should also be noted that Andrew's above !vote follows his recent pattern of AFD comments that are so obviously disruptive that they come across as deliberate trolling with the intention of pushing someone into opening a discussion as to whether he should be TBANned: linking to the actual master list in the same post as mislabeling this as the master list is ... just wrong. As for "alternatives to deletion": AFD is (per pretty overwhelming consensus here and here) the proper forum for community discussion of whether an article should be redirected without its contents preserved in the live version of the encyclopedia, as there is no other place for it short of boldly making an edit one knows can be reverted on the grounds of it being de facto spontaneous deletion and therefore needing to be brought to AFD (cf. : people procedurally oppose RMs with "userfy" or "draftify" as the intended result on the grounds that these are frequently AFD/MFD results and I haven't found any discussion where that process actually was supported by consensus). Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 12:54, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 20:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Definitely original research and there is only one reference in the article. 344917661X (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete- Extreme fancruft with poor sourcing and subjective inclusion criteria. The title is too vague to be useful and the content is not able to be merged anywhere. Reyk YO! 12:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information. Criteria are entirely subjective and unsourced. ƒirefly  ( t · c · who? ) 21:07, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of fictional extraterrestrials. Perhaps some of the information can be merged there later on.  A lot of the blue links are just redirects.   D r e a m Focus  06:51, 19 June 2018 (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.