Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional military operations


 * 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. Yank sox 21:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

List of fictional military operations
The tiny amount of meaningful information this simple list presents is original research. (Contested PROD) ➥the Epopt 02:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I really I don't concur with the reason for nomination (I don't see any original research in this article), though I do think this article is poorly organized and probably needs to be rewritten. Perhaps seperated into individual fictional works in some cases.  Still, it's no worse than List of military operations FrozenPurpleCube 03:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per FrozenPurpleCube. ςפקι Д Иτς ☺ ☻ 03:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as a list too far. This list doesn't define its parameters: so far it appears to include only recent movies, but the title would imply that it could include other media, such as books and computer games.  There must be thousands of films which would qualify, and tens of thousands of books, so the list will either be absurdly selective or impossibly huge.  There's also a boundary issue, a lot of fiction using fictionalised derivations of military operations; how heavily fictionalised must an op be for inclusion? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, it already includes things besides movies. There's several books, computer games and TV series mentioned.  However, I do agree with you that this list needs some explicit specifications.  It might even be worth breaking into sections based on TV/movies/books/computer games as media.  FrozenPurpleCube 03:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia shouldn't be a TV guide.  This is just another collection of information somebody made from watching TV. Mr Spunky Toffee 03:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not jsut from TV, but also collected from video game manuals, books, and references. --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment BTW, has anybody here looked at the Category for Lists of fictional things ? FrozenPurpleCube 03:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, Great Ghu. That's the scariest thing I'll see this Halloween. Unbelievable. Bpmullins 20:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh. Delete for the article itself. -- Bpmullins 00:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Comprehensive list would be unmanageably long. Don't see the encyclopedic value either. Listcruft. Please, please, someone make a special ListWiki so listcrufters can be shipped off to their own home Bwithh 03:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The encyclopeddic value is that's it a rather quick reference. Ever tried looking up a certain type of Hydrania?  Wikipedia tends to have it kind of hard looking for specific types of things.  --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete not really OR, but it is unencyclopedic listcruft. Opabinia regalis 04:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per my reasoning on Articles for deletion/List of fictional wars.-- TBC Φ  talk?  06:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. In what way is it original research? I'm sorry, but I don't see it. People seem to be throwing around the term "original research" more and more these days without reading Wikipedia policy on the subject. OR is "unpublished arguments, ideas, data, or theories" according to the definition, and these entries do not fall into that category. Please stop invoking OR when you actually mean "I don't like this article". It's a perfectly valid list. -- Necrothesp 11:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Listcruft - no use to man nor beast. BTLizard 12:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Listcruft. It's a useless list because it is so broad. I don't really find much use for it and it doesn't seem encyclopedic. Hobbeslover talk/contribs 16:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Can anyone elaborate why it is listcruft?  --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete The list is OR and the title is far grander than the content, which is restricted in genre and in historical depth. Edison 18:21, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Then the there will be several smaller lists going around Wikipedia --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, very pointless list. Sandstein 23:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -- list lacks the Scouring of the Shire, World War III from Red Storm Rising, the Dominion War, and, I dunno, gazillions of other fictional military operations. Category is far too broad; even a reasonable threshold of notability would probably bloat this page beyond the point of maintainability. Haikupoet 06:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * For one thing, the Dominion war and World War III, is a WAR, not a specific military operation. There is a difference.  The Scouring of the Shire is a sepcific event in the Lord of the Rings, not a planned overall assualt with stragetic objectives.  The page is quite maintaianable, since there are not too many "Fictional Military Operations", and most can be verfied quickly if it is relavant to the plot or not.  --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - too broad a range of operations without articles to explain them. Keep them listed in the books/movies/games in which they appear. --Vossanova o&lt; 15:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Then if someone is searching for a specific operation, how will they know when and who and what series? --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - no corresponding category possible, as no one would suggest creating articles for these operations. The list currently lacks structure and is only alphabetical. Suggest that the topic is approached at a smaller level, such as overview articles for specific areas (such as military operations in computer game series X), and then create a category for those overview articles. Carcharoth 15:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * the List is structured enough. If you have issues, make recomendations to the talk page. --Eldarone 05:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - --Eldarone 19:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Fictional Military Operations is perfectly relevant to the many science fiction universes, books, RPG's, etc. It's a quick and easy aid for one to find a group from a stroy and look up the right series. And the ,list is maintable, and has been maintianed well. Also, this list is relavent due to the imporantce of the Military Operations to the plot of many stories.  Instead of creating many useless pages that just deals with the oneoperation, a single list will be able to maintian any and all plot relevant operations.  --Eldarone 23:37, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Cbrown1023 21:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Incredibly Strong Keep Lists are legitimate and useful parts of encyclopedia. There are lots of lists in Britannica, Compton's and others and so here is what could be the largest encyclopeia in the world, these sorts of things are essential as part of the ongoing quest to catalog human knowledge.  --164.107.92.120 23:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not an ongoing quest to catalog human knowledge. It is a general-purpose encyclopedia meant to be accessible to the general reader. This list is useless for the general reader. Detailed and unencyclopedic lists like this belong on a specialist wiki. Carcharoth 00:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Uselessness is only in the opinion of the editor. There are a variety of Fictional operations ranging from modern day stories to the fantastic.  It is useful for anyone researching stories or doing literacy reports.  --Eldarone 04:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. And for specialist information and trivia, go to a specialist website or wiki. Not to Wikipedia. Carcharoth 10:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. And who appointed you guardian of Wikipedia's policies and content? Because it's your opinion doesn't make it the one true way you know. -- Necrothesp 11:05, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Quite true. How do you suggest this debate moves forward? Carcharoth 13:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How about that this list is not speicalized in any way? It covers a broad range of fictional operations from many types of series and games, that it's not speicalized to fit in any sort of speicalized Wiki.  Tell me one Wiki that can take every single operation as one single list? --Eldarone 04:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Keep Not paper. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim   19:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete completely open-ended list per WP:NOT indiscriminate collection of information. Ohconfucius 01:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I actually like the idea of this list, but it's simply not sufficiently defined in terminology and thus excessively broad.  A comprehensive list would probably include hundreds of thousands of entries from books, games, movies, songs etc. -Kubigula (ave) 03:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, because I don't think depictions of military operations per se are that substantial in fiction, as opposed to battles or wars. This will inevitably be little more than a list of military operations that are referred to in fiction, which is trivia.  Postdlf 04:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as indiscriminate collection of information (like the other two). Do we want any list which can grow indefinitely? Also, Object because the threesome wasn't merged into one AfD. Duja► 15:12, 7 November 2006 (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.