Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Union Aerospace Corporation (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Will undelete if there's a suitable merge target. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Union Aerospace Corporation
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Referenced only to primary sources, no discussion of cultural impact, clearly fails WP:GNG. Prior deletion discussion was held 5 years ago, with 3 votes for deletion and 2 for keep ("because it's important"...). The article has not improved since then (even one editor who voted keep noted it needs better sources). I think it's time to say goodbye to this piece of fancruft. CC prior AfD participants: User:S@bre, User:XihrUser:Judgesurreal777,, User:Fee Fi Foe Fum, User:XX55XX, User:MBisanz and User:DGG Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete no press coverage (or other reliable sources), no secondary sources, it isn't important.  Alex discussion ★ 15:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete unless significant coverage in proper sources can be provided. TTN (talk) 17:24, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge - The problem with articles like this is that there's no proper place to merge to. It's important enough in the plot of some of the works to be a major antagonist. The only two solution I can think of are to either keep the article separate, or make a Doom Universe article like we do for some comic books.  DGG ( talk ) 21:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * @User:DGG: There's an easy solution: move content to http://doom.wikia.com/ . If the concept is not notable, it cannot stay on Wikipedia. I wouldn't mind if Notability (fiction) was more welcoming of this type of content, but as long as it isn't, I do not see how we can justify exception for fancruft like this. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:03, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. I found a few sources discussing it: several mentions in this book, which discusses how UAC fits into the "evil corporation" trope (one paragraph on page 226 and another paragraph on page 227); a Top Ten list on VG Chartz (but VG Chartz is on the verboten list at WP:VG/RS); another Top Ten list on Dorkly, but I never heard of Dorkly before (apparently it's CollegeHumor rebranded for gamers); and, finally, an article at TG Daily, which I also never heard of before.  The book doesn't has some commentary spread out over those two pages, but it's a bit sparse.  The two Top Ten lists come from sites of debatable reliability, but maybe they're OK for something this trivial.  And, finally, the TG Daily article is written by an English professor who moonlights as a video game contributor at obscure web sites.  Not an impressive article, especially for a college professor, but it's got two useable paragraphs of analysis at the end.  I'd appreciate any comments on these sources, as I'm feeling a bit iffy about each of them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:42, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge into Doom universe. Above listed sources still seem a bit iffy but there's been no objection to them. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:51, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as a fictional in-universe entity which has not exerted either significant cultural impact nor been the subject of multiple instances of substantial coverage in independently-published sources. Wikia is thattaway > (Jimmy Wales thanks you for your business and hopes you are pleased.) Carrite (talk) 17:45, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Per David G. above, if the creator wants this userfied so that information here may be integrated into a future Doom universe article, I have no objection, nor should anyone. Carrite (talk) 17:47, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no problem merging this stuff into a "Universe" article. I probably should have mentioned that.  Fixed. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:16, 25 November 2013 (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.