Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor Star Wars droids


 * 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 No consensus. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-14 01:52Z 

List of minor Star Wars droids

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Is there a reason for this list? For the vast part the entries for the droids do not even bother to assert notability within the fictional Star Wars universe - let alone provide reliable third-party sources that support notability - and there is no good reason why we should have lists of eminently non-notable droids, that are, by admission, minor. I have no doubt the information is all completely true, but that doesn't mean there should be a whopping great list of this unencyclopedic material: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. We are not here to collate all human knowledge, just that which is encyclopedic. Just because information is "useful" or "interesting" doesn't mean it belongs here: see WP:NOT and WP:ILIKEIT. Moreschi Request a recording? 16:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - Ordinarily I'd say merge into an overall list of minor characters, per WP:FICT policy on non-notable characters. However, since this is Star Wars, and there's simply so much stuff about it on Wikipedia already, I think merging would lead to excessively long articles. No point in trying to transwiki anywhere either - all this stuff is already probably covered in exhaustive detail on Wookiepedia, which is the right place for this kind of material. So it looks like Delete is the only option. (Sorry about the long rambling rationale.) Walton monarchist89 17:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject itself and of each other." The nature of Star Wars and its fan base is such that even minor characters within the Star Wars universe have receieved a lot of independent, non-trivial coverage. The current sourcing is inadequate, I agree, but many sources do exist to substantiate the contents of this article and the notability of the subject as defined in Wikipedia policy above. Normally, I would say delete all stuff that isn't properly sourced, but the amount of work done on this article is so massive that I'm unwilling to flush that all away. Keep it and tag it for better sourcing. Nick Graves 17:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'll be somewhat surprised if many of these droids really have non-trivial reliable sources devoted to them: non-trivial in the sense of non-fanbase. Moreschi Request a recording? 17:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I love it so much that this list exists.  But these just don't pass the notability requirement for Wikipedia, and their proper home is on the Star Wars fan wiki, where they will be appreciated as they deserve. -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, and as to previous keep, note that the sources must be multiple, non-trivial, reliable, and independent-this is not a "pick any three", said sources must satisfy all four. Star Wars fandom coverage would not be reliable sourcing, and therefore fails. The two "external links" cited don't remotely begin to satisfy the reliability guidelines. However, I'm entirely willing to change my opinion if such sources can be found. Anyone !voting "keep" should be prepared to cite sources, and be prepared to show or argue why those sources are independent (not affiliated with the Star Wars franchise), non-trivial (cover the subject in a sufficient depth for an encyclopedia article), and reliable (written by a source which is subject to editorial control or academic peer review.) I love Star Wars, but this just doesn't belong here. Seraphimblade 18:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per the recommendations of WP:FICT. Some should probably be removed to keep this list from getting out of hand, but it should all be sourceable. BryanG(talk) 23:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Why have lists of minor anything? Jtrainor 03:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Collecting the minor characters of a major series into lists like this is precisely what WP:FICT calls for. Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment But there are no sources other than two links to pics. This needs to be better sourced, or it has to go. Jtrainor 19:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - agreed with Jtrainor. What is more, these droids are so minor I really don't think that clause in FICT applies. It's not like the main point of and characters in Star Wars are droids. And yes, there are significant sourcing problems. Moreschi Request a recording? 19:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This site appears to be the official fansite for Star Wars, so I would believe that the things in their "databank" are reasonably canonical. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep — notable, Wikipedia is not paper and per BryanG (PS: Star Wars does not exist!) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Nick Graves. This absolutely needs many more sources, but I believe in this case the information can be sourced.  There are entire books on Star Wars universe subjects like these and I think it could eventually look like a respectable article with a bit of work adding sources. VegaDark 08:17, 12 February 2007 (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.