Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snowspeeder


 * 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 List of Star Wars air, aquatic, and ground vehicles. Arguments are that references provided are only passing mentions or primary sources and don't rise to the level required by our notability guidelines. I've already completed a partial merge, but if any additional content should be merged, it can be done so from the article history. (non-admin closure) Steven   Crossin  03:12, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Snowspeeder

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no doubt that many Star Wars vehicles are notable, as they have a ton of significance, influence, etc. Death Star, Star Destroyers, X-wing, TIE Fighter, the Walker... but I doubt this Snowspeeder ranks up there with them. Sources are poor - mentions in passing, primary sources, of course. Some merchandise, ditto. But there's no in-depth coverage, no sources for discussion of cultural impact, significance. There is no denying the immense impact SW had on culture but we don't need entries on footnote artifacts like this. Snowspeeder, a vehicle that made a brief and forgettable appearance in a single movie, is not encyclopedic-worthy. PS. I suggest soft delete, with redirect and possible merge of some content to List of Star Wars air, aquatic, and ground vehicles, where a mention of it can safely co-exist somewhere between the "Homing spider droid" and the "Wookiee ornithopter". Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:47, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 11:04, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 11:04, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 11:04, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 11:04, 23 June 2017 (UTC)


 * merge per above - probably something that could be done without AfD? Artw (talk) 15:44, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Switching to keep, per below seems like this thing gets enough mileage it should have its own article. Artw (talk) 21:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Video Game use, LEGO model, Collectibles guide, and a bare mention, but it's in the Guiness World Records 2017, Gamer's Edition. And then there's Google Scholar: Of snowspeeders and Imperial Walkers: Fannish play at the Wisconsin protests, The Empire's New Clothes, A Question of Character: Transmediation, Abstraction, and Identification in Early Games Licensed From Movies. Jclemens (talk) 02:13, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Which part of the 'mentions in passing don't qualify' you don't understand? Let's take a look at treatment of snowspeeder in : "The screen played a looped sequence from The Empire Strikes Back in which a Rebel Alliance snowspeeder attaches a cable to a huge lumbering AT-AT (All Terrain Armored Transport) Imperial Walker on the snow planet of Hoth. The speeder then winds the cable around the walker until the doglike machine is crippled, unable to walk, and collapses... Fannish signs and play can build that morale and strengthen those communities, and in that respect, they may occasionally prove as useful for bringing down Imperial Walkers as a well-placed light saber or snowspeeder cable." Which part of this plot summary/passing reference makes snowspeeder notable? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect - If it cannot establish notability, it does not need to exist. None of the above sources look particular useful. TTN (talk) 15:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect - agree that the sources are passing mentions and primary sources. Not notable enough on its own to merit an article. A Lego model means it's notable? If that's the best argument for Keep - well, tough sell. LAroboGuy (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2017 (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.