Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rank insignia of the Galactic Empire


 * 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 no consensus to delete Rank insignia of the Galactic Empire, merge Moff, delete Supreme Chancellor. Please take the merge discussion for Moff to Talk:Moff to determine exactly where to merge it. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:27, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Rank insignia of the Galactic Empire

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

In-universe No assertion of real-world notability with OR. Does not meet WP:FICT or pass WP:WAF. Suggest merging the second sentence into Galactic Empire (Star Wars), otherwise delete.

Also recommending the following for deletion for the same reason, which also are in-universe: --EEMeltonIV 15:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Without offending the nominator, I just did a Yahoo search for the term "Grand Moff" and found over 250 thousand internet hits. I think the nomination to delete the Moff article should be withdrawn based on the amount of material out there about it. I'm on the fence about the ranks article and the S.C. article absolutely should go.  To the nominator, all personal feelings aside, Moff should stay: it can be improved into a good article and with that many hits its notable enough to warrant some kind of attention on Wikipedia. -OberRanks 23:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The search results start with the Wikipedia article itself, then go on to include Wookieepedia, a couple of starwars.com articles, and a blog. Most of the links among the top 30 hits, even including the blogs and wiki sites, are for Grand Moff Tarkin -- a notable character. However, a character's title does not inherit notability from that character. --EEMeltonIV 00:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * So how about merging the Moff article into the article on Grand Moff Tarkin? I might do this in any case, since you have pointed out Tarkin is a notable character. -OberRanks 10:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd be okay with a sentence in Grand Moff Tarkin along the lines of "Tarkin's rank, according to [source] (WEG's Imperial sourcebook comes to mind) is held by characters responsible for an oversector of several star systems." But, again, the rank itself is just a bit of trivia and including more than a few words about it would be giving it undue weight. --EEMeltonIV 01:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Then I change my vote to Merge specific ranks into the articlces about the characters in which they appear with an added stipulation that a link to the Wookipedia article be added somewhere linkin gthe Imperial ranks article to this site. The Wook article is extremely impressive to say the least.  Still hold on deleting the S.C. article. -OberRanks 14:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep : Wow, I don't know where to start. The article is very much not "in-universe".  It deals with the evolution of Imperial insignia through six movies of a major franchise not to mention countless books, comics, and manuals (a major one being "The Imperial Sourcebook" and the scripts of the actual films) over the past 30 years.  I also recently did some editing to explain the ranks in a more real world fashion and describe some of the on-screen apperances hoping to make the article better.  Have no idea why anyone would want to delete this article; it can be developed into a fine article, much like Starfleet ranks which is almost an identical concept (See Articles for deletion/Starfleet ranks and insignia for what happened when someone tried to VfD that article). -OberRanks 15:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:OTHERSTUFF -- this is about the Star Wars article, not Star Trek. --EEMeltonIV 15:59, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Didn't know about that policy. Still...worth mentioning. Some of the comments there might apply also apply here.  Have to add, EVERYONE should take a look at this and this.  I'm not saying that to influence the debate, it's just too funny to not have a look! ;-) -OberRanks 16:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Technically, it's just an essay, not a policy. -Chunky Rice 22:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Didnt realize all three were on the same boat. KEEP main rank article, MERGE the Moff article into the main ranks article, DELETE Supreme Chancellor article. -OberRanks 15:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Appears to be mostly original research. Much of the text is speculative.  Though, I have to admit that I'm a little surprised that there isn't some sort of source material for this.  If such material could be found and cited, the article could be kept.  Otherwise, delete -Chunky Rice 22:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not a valid deletion criteria. If it's written in-universe, re-write it. --Hemlock Martinis 00:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - while the second and third articles are in-universe, my main reason for nominating them (along with the original Rank insignia one) is that they make no assertion of notability and do not pass WP:WAF. --EEMeltonIV 02:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A Manual of Style guideline is irrelevant. The Star Trek one has shown that these types of articles can be improved. Request input from the Star Wars WikiProject; they will likely have suggestions for improvement. --Hemlock Martinis 06:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "A Manual of Style guideline is irrelevant" - I suppose, then, essays are irrelevant, too; nevertheless, I agree with WP:ONLYESSAY. "The Star Trek one has shown that these types of articles can be improved.'" - Again, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. "they will likely have suggestions for improvement." - I'm part of the Star Wars wikiproject (and the Star Trek one), and I don't think these articles meet the threshold for real-world notability. --EEMeltonIV 23:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I never said essays were irrelevant. A MoS guideline is quite different than an essay. --Hemlock Martinis 23:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delele. In or out of universe, it's fancruft and fails WP:RS and is at least borderline OR. Dbromage  [Talk]  01:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of notability from real world sources Corpx 02:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable, hasn't it been already nominated before though? - Flubeca Talk 21:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Close. --EEMeltonIV 00:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Especially if someone is willing to rewrite/source and cite. --BHC 03:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Question - Please offer a reason why. --EEMeltonIV 04:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Star wars is an international phenomenon of tremendous popularity, with substantial interest in even the smaller details. Well sourced and well written articles are a boon to wikipedia, I'm not convinced this article needs to be deleted if my original criteria were to be met. --BHC 09:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep it's already well written and can be improved if neccessary. --134.109.124.40 09:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:FIVE this is just more in-universe fan cruft, not anything NEAR being worthy of encyclopedic note. Burntsauce 20:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom & Burntsauce ↑. Or send to Wikifictioncruft. --Evb-wiki 01:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I believe all three articles are well-written and they don't impose too much on the reader's patience. Taking a glance over at WP:FICT I see that Characters of Final Fantasy VIII is given as an example of a good article. Personally, I would not want to slog through a long article like that unless I was a super-fan. Those nominated for deletion here are a better use of space, they are coherent and simple, and they make small observations about the Star Wars series that seem they might interest a non-expert who was just passing through. EdJohnston 02:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete / transwiki to wookieepedia... this is wikipedia, not Wookieepedia. In-universe fancruft, big pile of banta pudu. All but the general star wars articles should be moved to wookiepedia for detailed information... Besides, give me FIVE!!! Thanks! --Cerejota 05:05, 28 August 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.