Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonic weaponry in popular culture


 * 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   delete. Shereth 03:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Sonic weaponry in popular culture

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This seems to be just a trivial dumping ground for anything related to Sonic Weaponry. Relevant content should be in the sonic weaponry article only, not in this subpage of clutter. RobJ1981 (talk) 07:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete article is just a trivia list. An attempt could be made to write an encyclopedic article on the subject and its real world impact but, this isn't it and probably isn't even the skeleton of it. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions.   — Lenticel  ( talk ) 09:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom --SkyWalker (talk) 10:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'd be surprised if there weren't some mention in some sci-fi magazine or film book, given gadgets like Dr Who's sonic screwdriver. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Indiscriminate list of very loosely associated bits of information. Plus, they forgot Earth vs. the Flying Saucers and Target Earth. Deor (talk) 11:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Crufty cesspit, they also forgot Banshee one of the early X-Men. L0b0t (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a trivia list. Masterpiece2000   ( talk ) 14:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - While I think Casliber may have been on to something regarding Doctor Who's sonic screwdriver, but I'm not sure there's enough real world info out there to really warrant this list. Umbralcorax (talk) 14:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I guess almost every sci-fi movie or television series has sonic weapons, which would make this list indiscriminate (WP:NOT). I wouldn't mind seeing a nice sourced paragraph or two about this topic at Sonic weaponry, but this list is just a bad idea. – sgeureka t•c 15:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This list is.  Red Phoenix  flame of life...protector of all... 01:40, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game related deletions. MrKIA11 (talk) 16:00, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - Merg to Sonic weaponry and could also have some references. --Pinkkeith (talk) 21:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge anything useful with Sonic Weaponry. And make sure Hawkwind's Sonic Attack gets a mention too. --  Ka renjc
 * Also, Noise Marines. L0b0t (talk) 22:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep a good place to bring the material together.If sssentially every game and what not has it, then frst,it shows that this feature is notable, and ,second, it makes the potential length too long for a merge. DGG (talk) 23:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge to Sonic Weaponry. there're Google Books refs, topic is popular within the society and Wikipedia needs to cover this popularity. I agree that rewriting as some sourced paragraph could be nice, but content must be kept now for that to happen later. --PeaceNT (talk) 05:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Zef (talk) 15:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve. Notable element of (sorta) fictional technology, and as DGG puts it above, the abundance of information suggests both notability and lack of suitability for merges elsewhere.  Ford MF (talk) 21:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, but don't keep (so merge or just redirect) in any case. This is awful, it's just a list of every time there's a form of attack that has something to do with sound. Some of these aren't even weapons. Ugh. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Have sonic weapons really had a significant enough impact on popular culture to warrant an encyclopedia article? Popular does not always mean notable. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 01:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:NOT. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 04:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * actually, I think it does. I interpret the guideline as saying that things can be notable even if they are not popular. But in any event, widely used by notable artists is saying a good deal more than "popular." DGG (talk) 04:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails to meet the general notability guideline of coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. If someone turns up some kind of "sonic weaponry monthly" magazine, I'll change my vote. Randomran (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Trivial list.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 18:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, created contrary to WP:TRIVIA. Does not cite sources that speak to the subject (or any that don't, almost). WillOakland (talk) 20:46, 12 June 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.