Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mallora


 * 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 merge and redirect to List of minor characters in Star Trek: Enterprise. Please create the article and merge the content there within the next few days. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: I left a notice at WikiProject Star Trek asking that this merger be completed so that it can be done however they determine is best. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 05:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Mallora

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Minor fictional character with no real-world notability Ejfetters 21:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC) I am also nominating the following minor fictional subjects from Enterprise due to lack of real-world notability as well:


 * Merge and redirect most instead of deleting. Merge Mallora and other Xindi to List of Xindi. Merge other characters to new List of minor characters in Star Trek: Enterprise; Arik Soong is probably worth keeping. Pa'nar to Stigma (Enterprise). etc. - Fayenatic (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Are lists exempt from notability requirements? Is these are merged and redirected to the articles you suggest, does that confer them the requisite notability?  —   pd_THOR  undefined | 23:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect most instead of deleting per above. Pa'nar Syndrome appears to be a subject that should have more outside impact and most likely could be brought up to spec. Agathoclea 23:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * See What Wikipedia is not -- Descriptions of fictional works. Wikipedia's coverage of works of fiction should provide sourced information to provide commentary on the works' real-world context, such as development, production, distribution, and cultural reception and impact. Both for encyclopedic purposes, and also to qualify as fair use, summary descriptions of plot, characters and settings are appropriate only in the context of real-world information, not when they are the sole content of an article or told entirely from an in-universe perspective. This applies both to stand-alone works and to series. (See also Wikipedia:Television episodes, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), Wikipedia:Notability (fiction), Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines#Plot.) These articles are not notable enough in their current forms to stand alone because they are almost entirely in-universe reiterating plot subjects.  There is doubtedly enough real-world information on these minor subjects/characters to add that would rectify this.  These are great articles for memory alpha though, but as for Wikipedia I am afraid not. Ejfetters 06:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect i do not see why this needed to come here in the first place--combining this into lists of minor characters, etc. is a reasonable editing decision. If the eds. involved think one or two worth keeping separate they can discuss it there. DGG (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete All per nom. Without reliable secondary sources, there is no justification for these articles, nor their merger into an even longer list of characters with no real world notability. --Gavin Collins 12:44, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply (with acknowledgements to User:Carcharoth): This is verifiable non-notable information that can be merged to an article on a notable topic to provide the wider context that is needed. A list does not require reliable sources to establish the independent notability of its constituent items; all that is required is that the concept being listed is notable. The individual items do not have to be notable. Notability quite clearly states the following:"'If appropriate sources cannot be found, if possible, merge the article into a broader article providing context' [...] 'For instance, articles on minor characters in a work of fiction may be merged into a 'list of minor characters in ...'; articles on schools may be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located; relatives of a famous person may be merged into the article on the person; articles on persons only notable for being associated with a certain group or event may be merged into the main article on that group or event.'" It is clear here that mergers of the minor characters are viable, and would provide sufficient context to retain brief character information when the excessive plot summary info had been stripped out. For the non-character articles, keeping redirects is cheap, allows categorisation, and prevents existing links from going red. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per Fayenatic. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 06:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect --LeyteWolfer 16:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge Trellium-D to Delphic Expanse if that one survives its own AFD (which it should, as it provides context for the whole of season 3). - Fayenatic (talk) 00:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was wondering where that particular one could go, and that sounds like a good place to merge it. Good idea. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 01:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect I can agree with merging these into the various lists of Star Trek characters. The articles are mostly about charcters that appear in only a few episodes, or even just one episode, and are of almost no importance to the Star Trek universe let alone our own, real universe. As for Trellium-D, it can be merged into the article on the episode it appeared in, "Impulse" Johnred32 (talk) 04:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've now proposed that Delphic Expanse be merged into a list of regions, see draft at User:Fayenatic london/List of Star Trek regions of space. Trellium-D could still go into that section, or into "Impulse"; it's significant in other episodes e.g. "Damage" but "Impulse" may be best as that is where its effects were introduced. - Fayenatic (talk) 14:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect - Would be really good to do as they are all non -notable stubs on their own. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect would be the most appropriate options here. Capitalistroadster (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Star Trek has been notified of this ongoing discussion. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 03:09, 11 December 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.