Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Starseed


 * 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 redirect to Outsider (Known Space). Of course, any editor may change the redirect target as an editorial decision. NAC— S Marshall T/C 21:55, 25 December 2012 (UTC)'''

Starseed

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Entirely not notable. Should be merged into the article for the fiction work it is related to, or deleted entirely. ReformedArsenal (talk) 00:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - No need to have this article on Wikipedia. 00:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This is a discussion, not a vote, ReformedArsenal. We know that you want the article deleted without your having to repeat it in boldface.  Uncle G (talk) 10:40, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Every AfD I have ever seen uses this format of voting, and in the past I have had people encourage me to vote initially to make it crystal clear. Also, the main article for the AfD page recommends that "Usually editors recommend a course of action in bold text, e. g., "Keep", "Delete", "Merge", "Transclude" or other view. Some bots and tools which parse AfD's will only recognize bolded words, so following this convention is highly recommended."ReformedArsenal (talk) 11:06, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Now go and read Guide to deletion and every other discussion on today's AFD per diem page. Far from this being the case for "every AFD discussion I have ever seen", you are in fact the sole nominator who got this wrong today.  Discussions are read and closed by humans, not robots, moreover.  Once again:  This is a discussion, not a vote.  Uncle G (talk) 12:23, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should take a look a little further in your guide my friend. Guide to deletion. Also, the VAST majority of discussions for December 10th have recommendations listed in EXACTLY the format that I used (because that's what the guide recommends). If you're beef is that I contributed my recommendation, then so be it. But the format of using bolded headings has a long standing precedent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReformedArsenal (talk • contribs) 2012-12-11 13:23:09
 * I've pointed you to the Guide. I've pointed you to all of the other AFD discussions as examples.  I've even given you the explanation from the Guide.  Obviously it takes a very large cluestick indeed.  &#9786;  Uncle G (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, you're guide... and all the other discussions... format it the way I did. ReformedArsenal (talk) 15:30, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The administrator deletion tool isn't required here. This is a poor article that, from a review of the sources documenting Niven's works, has no chance of ever improving.  Looking at, I observe that Starseeds are not documented separately from Outsiders even by the author.  This article should either redirect to Outsider (Known Space) or star seed, depending from editorial decision as to which redirect serves readers better and whether Known Space characters or, perhaps better given Known Space, species in Known Space (which is how Jack Cohen and Ian Stewart collect the topic in Figments of Reality) ever come about.  But the edit tool gets us from here to there, not the deletion tool.
 * Uncle G (talk) 10:40, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've read most of the Known Space stories, and this is a minor element. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You haven't addressed the fact that it's also a novel, a band, and a song. See the editorial decision mentioned immediately above.  Uncle G (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * So move Starseed (disambiguation) here after deletion. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:52, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 14:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisting comment: I've relisted it so that AfD participants can actually discuss whether the topic is notable, not about the process of whether or not to have an AfD. Here's a hint: administrators closing AfDs ignore all that clutter and look only at the arguments presented for and against deletion. So it'd be nice if someone could present some rather than arguing about process. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "The administrator deletion tool isn't required here." and what follows is a fairly clear one, already presented long since. On the principle that one shouldn't opine an editorial action that one is unwilling to do onesself, I could have just done this by now.  But heigh-ho.  &#9786;  Uncle G (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Selective merge to Known Space, where starseeds probably should have their own short entry but currently do not. PWilkinson (talk) 16:54, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete nothing to WP:verify notability. Without reliable third party sources articles typically get deleted. Perhaps a redirect to the fiction would be ok. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2012 (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.