Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resistance is futile


 * 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.   Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  22:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Resistance is futile

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I do not believe the content of this article to be notable. The article describes a catchphrase attributed to characters in Star Trek, a catch phrase already noted on the article on the characters themselves. The references given are simply there to create a list of quotes, with no notability noted from other sources Alastairward (talk) 17:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Borg article. Ham Pastrami (talk) 18:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't that therefore be Assimilate? -- RoninBK T C 18:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Clarify: merge the Borg quotes to the Borg article. That eliminates the charge of cruft for this article (though if you want to delete the Borg article, that's another question). Ham Pastrami (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Arctle clearly mentions it's use outside of and prior to it's use in the star trek universe. Therefore a merge would not be appropriate. It's common usage in the media is very easy to source . Thought the article could easily be improved to include these. -- neon white user page talk 19:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I agree that a merge is not much use here, there's precious little to the article other than to state that it was used before Star Trek writers used it and has been used elsewhere. A redirect to the Borg might be more appropriate, the link for the phrase "Resistance is useless" in the article redirects to the "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" article. Is there any significance to the use of this phrase in the media? Only one of the links provided actually shows the phrase being used with reference to the show's characters. Alastairward (talk) 00:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You're missing the point, the phrase does not originate from the show, it was popularised by the show/film and has now achueved common usage unrelated to the show. -- neon white user page talk 02:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm just going on what was in the article when I nominated it for deletion. It was poorly referenced only included quotes from within the show. They could probably be pruned and replaced with more references from the media. If there was an article noting its use by media outside Science Fiction magazines that would be ideal Alastairward (talk) 10:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The quotes from the show could be selectively merged to the Borg article if you don't want it in the proposed article. Or they could simply be edited out. Deleting the whole article doesn't seem like a reasonable first line of action. Ham Pastrami (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, at the very least the phrase enjoyed a brief flurry of use at the height of the 2003 invasion of Iraq (due to an analyst's quote, I guess, but some in the media made Borg comparisons or at least mentioned Star Trek). --Dhartung | Talk 00:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, there are numerous Google Books results showing its use (and ample discussion) in contemporary writing on domains ranging from parenting to Manifest Destiny. --Dhartung | Talk 00:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * comment - The phrase has certainly achieved real-world recognition beyond the Star Trek fanbase, and probably a lot of people who know the phrase don't know its origin. --Lquilter (talk) 23:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sigh... If only I could find a non-blog article about the Girl Scout Cookies advertisement that just showed two scouts holding up a box with the caption "Resistance is Futile"... -- RoninBK T C 10:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep a known and notable phrase. -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 07:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we've ascertained that it's a phrase that people recognise, we're just looking for cites outside science fiction circles. Perhaps if you have some, you could add them to the actual article Alastairward (talk) 09:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Very culturally significant; I'm going to go about finding a few examples of where it has been used in reliable settings (for example, TIME, NYT). Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  00:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It would be good if we could have some cites before the end of the discussion Alastairward (talk) 08:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I understand the nomination, and truthfully, it is difficult to find the kind of citations that would really improve the article. What I find, and others have cited, is a huge number of headlines of articles and blogs that contain the phrase. By sheer number, I think there is some notability here, however, I have no yet seen any references that comment on the phrase and would improve the article. Still, I cannot ignore these results. Xymmax (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment, would it be acceptable to use a link to a google search? I agree that it would probably be difficult to find an all encompassing link for everything Alastairward (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you mean linking to a google search inside of articles, then that would go against External links, 10: "Links to search engine and aggregated results pages." Black Falcon (Talk) 21:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That's what I meant, if it goes against the rules then we can do without. I'll probably change my nomination of deletion now to a weak keep. It seems like a hard phrase to prove as with other articles as popular, but the arguments seem to indicate it's reasonably well known and we've provided proof on this page at least. I take it a link is kept to this discussion on the talk page afterwards? Alastairward (talk) 09:13, 6 February 2008 (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.