Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Self destruct button
- 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Merged and redirected by Bushytails Ryan Norton T | @ | C 07:10, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not expandable beyond a stub
Delete --Trovatore 04:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]- Comment: could an article be written at self-destruct that would cover this? Besides the button, it could include other self destruct mechanisms, like those used on rockets that go out of control. -- Kjkolb 04:46, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge self-destruct has a "Use in fiction" heading that this could fit under - Anetode 04:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge with "use in fiction" as suggested by Anetode. This could be better written and slightly expanded. Crypticfirefly 04:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to self-destruct. I'm skeptical that there's much expansion to be done, but have at it... --Trovatore 05:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect, there is already an article at self-destruct, I linked to self destruct, which didn't have a redirect. It does now. -- Kjkolb 07:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge as per Kjkolb. --Apyule 07:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge or Redirect per above Ryan Norton T | @ | C 09:02, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge, per above. Information is happiest when it is most completely in context! -- BD2412 talk 16:53, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Redirect, as the material's tone isn't that suitable to a merge. This is a pretty big concept in fiction, and we should have something on it, though.--Scimitar parley 16:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Push self-destruct button. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trovatore (talk • contribs) 04:31, 4 October 2005
- Merge as per above. Regarding the tone, I think an article of this tone is okay on its own given the subject matter, but if the stuff it's being merged with is written in a more serious manner, then signifiacntly rewrite. --Jacquelyn Marie 15:54, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Be bold... Merged and redirected. Bushytails 07:04, 9 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.