Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Flint


 * 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. &mdash; Coren (talk) 07:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Flint

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No assertion of real-world notability, no citations to reliable sources providing critical commentary or development information. Article is just plot summary and other in-universe trivia. I had redirected the article to the character's \first/most significant appearance, but User:FrankWilliams (sometimes editing under this IP) has reversed it. --EEMIV (talk) 13:53, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The information above is not true. If one reads the article there sources and reliable; I think the books mentioned are reliable.  The episode cited is certainly reliable.  Real world notability talks about real world context; well the character although fictional was suppose be many well known and famous persons.  If that's not a link to real world I don't know what is.  As for being user User:FrankWilliams I see that this user has come from the same IP as this is an Internet Gateway but this is not me; I have seen some of that users edits and have edited that same ones as I was curious about Wiki; thanks for the clever analysis however.  206.125.176.3 (talk) 14:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Please take a look at WP:FICT, WP:WAF and WP:RS. Additionally, being a fictional portrayal of real people doesn't make the former notable; a fictional portrayal doesn't inherit notability from the subject being portrayed. --EEMIV (talk) 14:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.107.170.105 (talk • contribs)
 * Can you point to a policy or guidelines to substantiate the claim that notability is inherited? --EEMIV (talk) 17:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletions.   —Quasirandom (talk) 15:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This article suffers from being written with no regard for the difference between fantasy and reality. "He was many famous people throughout history: Johannes Brahms, Leonardo da Vinci, Solomon, Alexander the Great, Lazarus, Methuselah, Merlin, Abrahmson, and a hundred other people we do not know. He knew some of the greatest minds in history: Galileo, Socrates and Moses. He was present in Constantinople in 1334 and witnessed bubonic plague kill half of Europe. He has married hundreds of times and to his anguish watched his loved ones age and die."  I'm sure that, like all TV characters, there will be people who speak out about how necessary it is to have an article about this person (apparently, he's mentioned in some of the "Star Trek novels" too, oooh!).  Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here.  Mandsford (talk) 17:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: The comment by Mandsford is unwarranted and unbecoming of a serious editor. I've also checked his user page and he has a history of this type of behavior an Admin needs to look into this. 206.125.176.3 (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * At least I sign my comments, "206". Mandsford (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article fails policies such as WP:RS, WP:FICTION, WP:WAF. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please add justification for your opinion; I don't see how this this can be used in any voting mechanism without an explanation. 206.125.176.3 (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Response - Did you miss the part where he identified guidelines and "policies such as WP:RS, WP:FICTION, WP:WAF" that this article fails to meet? These are all compelling reasons to axe this material. --EEMIV (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - These policies are not clear cut and open to interpretation. He needs to explain how they apply or not apply.  Just because this user agrees with your POV does not means he doesn't need to explain his/her position.  I could very easily say the article does meet WP:RS, WP:FICTION, WP:WAF.  206.125.176.3 (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Requiem for Methusaleh -- although it might be even better to redirect to flint (disambiguation) as there are quite a few other "Mr. Flints" in fiction alone. --Dhartung | Talk 20:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Requiem for Methusaleh does not contain enough information regarding the character to warrant just a redirect; this is the whole point of having a separate article. 206.125.176.3 (talk) 20:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The information is itself not worth including; it is trivia and plot summary. --EEMIV (talk) 21:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * So what's stopping you from adding the information to the episode article? Sort of a circular argument if you ask me. Like looking for the money you dropped where the light's better? --Dhartung | Talk 00:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, and Flint is a minor character in the Star Trek universe. This article is unsourced plot summary. It does not connect out-of-universe, never mind establishing notability from a real-world perspective. • Gene93k (talk) 21:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment the best merge location would be List of Star Trek characters: A-F. Where inexplicably he isn't mentioned at all. —Quasirandom (talk) 22:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge back into the Requiem for Methuselah article and Redirect. Mr. Flint doesn't merit his own article.  Mandsford (talk) 22:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, no hint of real world notability. In fairness it should be noted that if we lived in the Star Trek universe, this character would be very notable. Perhaps there's a wiki for that. / edg ☺ ☭ 04:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been listed on the talk page for WikiProject Star Trek. • Gene93k (talk) 04:42, 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.