Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of physically unusual fictional planets

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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 16:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was PROD-ed, but removed as "has huge potential for literary scholarship" by user JJay . Poorly entry criterion of "considerably different", "fiction" here appears to apply to video games as well as novels, and tantamount to original research. If and when we can assemble a list of fictional planets that ware refered to in reliable sources as "physically unusual" than this will need an article. Right now, it doesn't.
brenneman^{T}{L} 14:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and merge anything useful and encyclopedic to Planets in science fiction. Daniel Case 15:02, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or merge (let's remember GFDL) everything to Planets in science fiction, although the result is going to be quite long. -- JJay 15:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete, merge with Planets in science fiction. Good material but largely duplication of Planets in science fiction. Easier to maintain in one place. Weregerbil 15:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Planets in science fiction. --Terence Ong 15:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and Delete per nom -- Alpha269 15:37, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, and this wouldn't be worth keeping even if the planets weren't "physically unusual." This is some of the cruftiest cruft I've ever seen. Brian G. Crawford 17:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment See also List of fictional planets by medium, List of socially unusual fictional planets, List of sentient fictional planets. I think possibly the list by medium is the one to keep, since there are fictional planets in other genres than science fiction. All the others, I'm afraid, should probably be merged. Шизомби 19:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete- Honestly, if this is kept we should all just bite the bullet and call this site Cruftipedia. Reyk 21:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and Merge per Daniel Case -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 21:46, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• DELETE every fictional planet is physically unusual, even Earth clones (being Earth clones makes them unusual). 132.205.45.110 22:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Or define "physically unusual". Average Earthman 22:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(UTC)

• Delete Is this a joke? εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 23:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as I originally prodded. Can anyone convince me when a fictional planet would ever be notable enough to have its own article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by JimmyO (talk • contribs) 00:10, 7 March 2006

• See Krypton or the 121 articles in Category:Fictional planets -- JJay 00:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep != Lowest Common Denominator. That kind of logic means that until every single unencyclopedic article gets deleted we can't even delete one. Unless someone goes on a mass nomination spree... *rolls up sleeves*
    brenneman^{T}{L} 01:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the keep vote. In response to your question, obviously we can delete fictional planets if they don't exist. The real fictional planets should all be kept though. -- JJay 12:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Planets in science fiction Denni ☯ 01:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fail consensus for that, I will support a merge. Eusebeus 12:39, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A list of trivia is not an encyclopedia article. Ned Wilbury 15:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• List of trivia lists is a good place to start. See also List of Hot 100 (U.S.) chart achievements and trivia, List of John Lennon Trivia, List of silly, pointless lists on Wikipedia (a redirect but I couldn't resist) etc. -- JJay 16:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge per Denni. Carlossuarez46 19:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. Somehow interesting but hard to define and hard to maintain. I can imagine that in the future, when (if) Wikipedia will provide more advanced tools such list could be created and kept. Now it is just text waiting to accumulate cruft. Pavel Vozenilek 23:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and don't merge. I created this page out of a very lengthy section on physically unusual planets that had already existed at Planets in science fiction. But everything in that section either has already been moved to PiSF or soon will be; and it really has no need to exist independently IMO. The same thing goes for List of socially unusual fictional planets and List of sentient fictional planets, both of which have similar origins.RandomCritic 18:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.