Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of organizations in the Honorverse (2nd nomination)


 * 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. T. Canens (talk) 06:23, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

List of organizations in the Honorverse
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

In-universe fancruft pertaining to a series of novels. Fails MOS:REALWORLD and WP:GNG with no discernible coverage of this particular subtopic in third-party reliable sources. Such content is better suited to fan wikis.  Sandstein  21:25, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I've read most of the novels, I like the series, and I like David Weber as an author, but, as Sandstein says, it is fancruft and fails MOS:REALWORLD and WP:GNG, with the only source cited being David Weber's blog. It has been nine years since the last AfD, and no one has been able to find another reliable source for this? It appears that the coverage is just not there. - Donald Albury 22:33, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 23:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 23:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 23:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 23:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. I concur, honorverse wikia is the place for such stuff. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  01:09, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Honorverse. Wikipedia is no longer the place for this sort of thing, it can all be found elsewhere easily by those wanting to see this and even greater detail.   D r e a m Focus  05:38, 1 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete- poorly sourced fancruft. Does not pass our notability requirements. Reyk YO! 08:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge into Honorverse. I would be willing to do the merge. Debresser (talk) 17:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as there is no coverage of this content to be found in independent reliable sources. I'm also confused by the calls for a merge. The article is virtually unsourced, spreading unsourced content across the encyclopedia goes against WP:V. RetiredDuke (talk) 10:34, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Not really. The content is sourced to the books. In any case, if sourcing is the problem, then after a nerge, feel free to tag whatever needs to be sourced. Debresser (talk) 14:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I oppose a merger because the content still fails MOS:REALWORLD, is not reliably sourced, and should therefore not be merged. Wikipedia is not a fancruft repository, in this or another article.  Sandstein   16:49, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per Sandstein rationale.  Lubbad85   (☎</b>) 21:52, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete since there are no sources verifying the independent notability of the subject. It's a purely unsourced text, the result no doubt of personal enthusiasm and seemingly hard work, but Wikipedia is not a place for fans' loving entreaties. We cannot merge away anything: When a text is unsupported by references to outside sources, we do not dump it elsewhere in Wikipedia; we delete it. -The Gnome (talk) 09:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article contains nothing but completely unsourced, in-universe WP:PLOT. Simply merging unsourced information from one article to another article does nothing to solve either of these problems. Rorshacma (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.