Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Number Eight (Battlestar Galactica)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 05:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Number Eight (Battlestar Galactica)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The article has no secondary sources, and my BEFORE did not find much. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:01, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Television. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:01, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Battlestar Galactica characters. This article is unsourced, so regardless of its notability, its best off redirecting to the list right now. No prejudice towards its recreation if anyone can find sources. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Per improvements made since nomination. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:43, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect. AGFing on BEFORE, the abysmal state of the article (practically unreferenced plot summary) is self-evident. Redirect, preserve history, and hope one day sources appear and this can be restored. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Changing to keep per the source found by User:Vanamonde93. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:06, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep and recommend remedial BEFORE training for nominator. Seriously, if you haven't checked scholar, you really haven't done a before... especially on a sci-fi character: Academics are geeks and like writing about such things:
 * Techno-butterfly: Orientalism old and new in Battlestar Galactica Paywalled, and I don't have access.
 * Battlestar Galactica and International Relations, Nicholas Kiersey and Ivar Neumann, ISBN 978-0415632812, p. 124, possibly more.
 * Caeners, T. (2008). Humanity’s Scarred Children: The Cylons’ Oedipal Dilemma in “Battlestar Galactica.” Extrapolation (University of Texas at Brownsville), 49(3), 368–384. https://doi.org/10.3828/extr.2008.49.3.3 Once again, I don't have access to this.
 * Here's some of what I could grab via Google Books from Space and Time: Essays on Visions of History in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television by David Wright and Allan Austin, ISBN 978-0786436644
 * "Sharon Agathon is a significant incarnation of number Eight among the Cylon humanoid models. Her character repeatedly challenges the presumptions of what it means to be human in this world, often very directly in her confrontations or conversations with Bill Adama. Although another copy of Number Eight, Boomer, attempted to assassinate Adama at the end of season one, this version, who bonded with her co-pilot, Karl Agathon, while on the run on Caprica, becomes pregnant and throws her lot in with Colonial humanity. This version of Number Eight bears the first known human/Cylon child and also becomes a close confidante of Bill Adama over the course of seasons two and three. Although ostensibly a prisoner of the Colonials, once she engineers an escape from the ruins of Caprica for herself, her lover, and Thrace, Sharon Agathon repeatedly demonstrates her trustworthiness so that she is eventually made an officer by Adama and given the call-sign Athena.
 * "Adama's protectiveness towards this copy of Number Eight that he has come to know further blurs the barriers between Colonial and Cylon. For the first time, we see the suggestion of a concept of reciprocal accommodation between Colonials and Cylons on more than a personal level. How ever, this accommodation is based upon mutual respect emerging between..." You get the point.
 * So, those are just the top four Google Scholar hits on this topic as picked from the default search template--I didn't have to search with other words or remove the words in parentheses... these are lying around for anyone to see... as long as they take even a perfunctory look at Google Scholar. Jclemens (talk) 05:43, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I apologize for forgetting to check Google Scholar. I will try not to make that mistake again. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:10, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Apology accepted--can you access any of the three scholar refs I cannot, perhaps through the Wikipedia Library? I have access through two university libraries, but neither has access to those journals. Jclemens (talk) 22:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * If you cannot access them, how is this different from WP:GOOGLEHITS/WP:THEREMAYBESOURCES?? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Jclemens (talk) 06:09, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect WP:BEFORE shows either trivial mentions or plot recaps. Not enough WP:SIGCOV to write a meaningful section about its reception or analysis. Shooterwalker (talk) 03:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC) Striking !vote, since editor has entered an amended !vote below. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:42, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. The topic is unquestionably notable; google scholar has at least a dozen reasonable hits, of which I'm particularly struck by this, which is an entire journal article analysing the character: there's also the first source mentioned above that has a lot of material. This is also one of the primary characters of the show (well within the top 10 by screen time); as such, I think improvement is more likely if we actually have an article rather than a redirect: and while the current content is bad, it isn't material that would be out of place in a fleshed out article, so I don't see an urgent need to remove it. The !vote immediately above mine is way off the mark; the other redirect opinions are, at least, based in fact. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:37, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Nice find. I've added the source to the article. @Zxcvbnm, @Shooterwalker, in case they'd like to reconsider their votes. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The article has not reached the WP:HEY standard for me yet, especially given it could be discussed in a section. Sources may exist, but right now there is no reason to split. It should be improved in the character list and later split off if necessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:52, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Now greatly expanded. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Due to the effort put into improving the article, I am changing to weak keep. It still only has a couple of sources, but it is in a significantly better state. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:43, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Keep per sources added to the article. I'd appreciate more being added, but for now, this should be enough to demonstrate notability and keep it around. Pokelego999 (talk) 17:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep as the sources demonstrate notability and because of the improvements made. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. I earlier supported delete/redirect, but there is enough content here that it should be WP:PRESERVEd somewhere. A merge discussion can take place, if anyone believes it's better to clean it up than to expand it. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2023 (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.