Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weapons, equipment, and vehicles of the Necrons


 * 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. Reasons for keeping ("needs fixing", "bad faith") are not reasons based on Wikipedia's inclusion policies. Neıl 龱  10:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Weapons, equipment, and vehicles of the Necrons

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

This article does not cite any reliable sources which attest to the notability of the subject matter. , a comprehensive list of every weapon and vehicle included in any of their numerous codexes and Games Workshop-sanctioned expansions is not. None of these items have any real world notability, either individually or as a collection, nor have any of my attempts to find sources to the contrary borne fruit. The notability of this topic cannot be verified by reliable sources, and should deleted as has been done in the past in this area and in areas such as video games. Allemandtando (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Not only is this action is a direct interference to the transwiki process slated for this weekend, but I am also puzzled why the codex and guidebook are considered by you to be insufficient to fulfill the criteria of 'reliable sources'. 76.71.152.81 (talk) 17:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Just needs fixing, not deletion. And I'd argue the same for Star Wars or Star Trek technology.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.17.62.65 (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Nominator seems to have some sort of burr under his blanket about the 40K articles. L0b0t (talk) 20:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * There is nothing wrong with wanting to find and remove non-notable articles. Often, as is the case here, when you find one, you often find links to related pages. -Verdatum (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Primary sources are generally acceptable for fictional works. Given the popularity and scope of Warhammer universe, this should be kept, albeit with appropriate cleanup. Jclemens (talk) 20:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * transwiki Looks to be a subpage of a subpage of a fictional work. Wikipedia is not a game guide. Anon above mentions an effort to transwiki in place, sounds good to me. -Verdatum (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. No independant sources; Wikipedia is not a game manual. --Carnildo (talk) 07:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - there are no independant sources anywhere. Where is a single secondary source writing about this topic ? See the bit under original reasearch where it is rightly said "Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, published secondary sources.". If there are no secondary sources then the subject should not be written about here - Peripitus (Talk) 22:46, 6 July 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.