Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Per aspera ad astra


 * 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 to Ad astra (phrase). Stifle (talk) 12:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Per aspera ad astra

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

Just a translation and list of nonnotable uses of the phrase. Wikipedia is neither Wiktionary nor TVTropes. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Although I do think that the term has enough social/cultural/historical significance to justify its own page, the Ad astra (phrase) page already exists. The nominated page, along with Per ardua ad astra should be redirected there, with relevant information (if any) moved to the ad astra one. Dawkin Verbier (talk) 17:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * What relevant information would you recommend for moving over? I'm not challenging your opinion, but it is much easier for the editors who are completing a merge to fully understand what is being proposed. Joyous! | Talk 22:20, 17 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge into "Ad astra (phrase)". Essentially the same as Dawkin Verbier's comment.  This is clearly more than a dictionary definition, and at least some of the persons/institutions using the motto are themselves notable, although this is not a prerequisite for an article about the motto.  However, as one of several variations it might be better treated under the other page, and the list could probably use some trimming.  P Aculeius (talk) 16:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Which of the items or sections do you think are most likely in need of trimming? As above with Dawkin Verbier's comment, I'm not challenging your opinion, but as someone who frequently carries out these merges, it's much easier with some clarification. Joyous! | Talk 22:24, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I'd keep the nations, states, and cities for whom it's a motto, along with major organizations such as military units, but trim individuals of limited notability ("29th Governor General of Canada"), and relatively obscure or confusing entities ("Honored Scientist of Armenia", "Crew 2020"). IMO most, perhaps nearly all of the uses of the phrase in literature and music are passing or trivial uses.  The works it appears in may not be, but unless it's the theme of the work in question, what we have is a random selection from a potentially-limitless number of passing mentions in the arts.
 * If Vergil uses the exact phrase it might be notable in the body of the article, since it would be the first, or one of the first examples, and probably responsible for much of its subsequent use; a humorous translation in To Kill a Mockingbird or its appearance over the door of Starfleet Academy is not—probably—but some instances may have a better argument for significance than others. I don't see the benefit to listing every school, song, video game, or anime in which a motto appears, or the list will just keep growing out of control.  It might be notable that it's the motto of Winston Churchill or Heidelberg University; it's probably not notable that it's the motto of George Clooney or Pall Mall cigarettes or the Podunk Boys' Preparatory Academy.
 * Probably the first two images can go—the Apollo 1 plaque is a notable use (as the Voyager golden record would be), but the plaque isn't that famous, the picture of it isn't great, and it doesn't really add much to the article. The bookplate is crooked and has a lot of wasted space.  The coat of arms is a typical use, and designed for graphic appeal.  If two of them are kept, the Apollo 1 plaque at least has some cultural importance—nothing against Finland in the nineteenth century, but the illustration is a minor detail in the design of a relatively obscure book.  P Aculeius (talk) 00:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Merge to Ad astra (phrase), whether trimmed or not. BD2412  T 17:07, 23 November 2022 (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.