Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of melee weapons in the Star Wars universe


 * 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 Keep -- JForget 00:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

List of melee weapons in the Star Wars universe

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

In-universe plot summary and trivia. Only one item here has any real-world notability, and it already has its own article. --EEMIV (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - as there has been no assertion of notability through reliable sourcing. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Lack of sourcing is not a reason to delete; it's a reason to improve. I've contacted an editor who has a few books on the subject; however, he's on Wikibreak. Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  03:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ...and that's why I said "Lack of notability" as the reason to delete. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 08:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm familiar with those sort of books (I feel like I have a few in my basement at home), and in this case I support keeping and improving over deletion, per MoP above. Also it looks like the article has three source books as of right now, which I consider sufficient for real-world notability of this topic. -FrankTobia (talk) 19:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Being mentioned in a sourcebook does not establish notability. Please see WP:WAF. All the sourcebooks do is provide in-universe plot summary and trivia; there is no substantiation about how these weapons were developed (in the real world, that is) or critical response. I suspect these weapons are so non-notable that there is no sort of critical response out there to cite; this is an unencyclopedic topic. --EEMIV (talk) 21:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm almost certain there are "making-of-the-movie" type books with such information in them. For me, this is a case of insufficient sourcing rather than insufficient notability. -FrankTobia (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep following Frank's argument about sourcing. But if he has the books, perhaps he can now quickly add the references. This sort of combination article is the desirable way to deal with these topics--rather than the fancruft practice of having an article on each. This is the way to do it. DGG (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I'm at school and won't be able to rummage through my basement for a few weeks. I agree wholeheartedly that a "list of ..." type article is the proper way of dealing with such things on Wikipedia. If melee weapons are not notable, then perhaps a general List of weapons in the Star Wars universe would be? -FrankTobia (talk) 20:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * A general list for Star Wars weapons (or, preferably, a general article) would be optimal. &mdash; Deckiller 08:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I'll look around and see how many pages there are; if there isn't too much, I'll create one article. If there's a lot, how does creating List of weapons in the Star Wars universe A-P and List of weapons in the Star Wars universe Q-Z sound? Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  01:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the best way to approach Star Wars weapons is to have a "weapons in Star Wars", citing some weapons (vibroblades, blasters, etc) as examples. We'd probably have subarticles for blasters, lightsabers, and any others with a lot of real-world info. &mdash; Deckiller 06:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * How about this article and List of ranged weapons in the Star Wars universe? Just throwing out ideas. Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  06:54, 18 January 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.