Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1632 institutions

: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. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

===1632 institutions===

:{{la|1632 institutions}} ([{{fullurl:1632 institutions|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1632 institutions}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

non-notable, unsourced heap of plot from an alternate universe; fictional committees, high schools, leagues, nations, and newspapers (do see them;). Delete. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 13:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 13:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 13:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Jack Merridew 13:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• Strong delete very much per nom. Fictional universes really don't belong in Wikipedia, unless they are very notable. This goes too much into plot details, and while fan-developed fiction is something new and interesting, this conflicts against WP:PLOT by being very little more than description of the work's factions and events. Vital content not already there can be merged in the main article. Kotiwalo (talk) 14:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• : Hi, and thanks; see also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1632 plot threads and others @ Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements; there are also about 50+ related templates at WP:TFD over the last week. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• ::I'll check a couple of them, but you are free to quote my arguments if you like and agree with them and if they are applicable in the other cases as well. Kotiwalo (talk) 08:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Seems like a useful fictional background article. Were else would we put the contents? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• : This stuff belongs at [http://ericflint.wikia.com/wiki/Eric_Flint_Wiki Eric Flint Wiki] and/or [http://www.klaus-leiss.de/1632Tech/index.php/Main_Page 1632 wiki]. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. Transfer to Wikia. - Josette (talk) 17:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
• : The onus is on them; “come and get it” ;) Teh spam is on the table. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• :: I didn't mean you; if they don't move it, delete the crap ;) are you offering me spam? - Josette (talk) 07:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• ::: I believe the appropriate word would then be “flush”. Teh “spam” would be all this material from an alternate universe, and Wikia et al is welcome to it. That editors of wikis succumb to the allure of fandom is a testament to the skill of brand managers at sinking their marketing hooks into people's minds. It is all so self-indulgent; a leisure afforded to cossetted members of affluent hegemonic societies. I took a photo the other day of an element of the real world in a part of the world not quite so affluent where life is tough for many people. Consider the circumstances of stray dogs, for example, in a poor country. I'll grab that pic out of my phone in a minute. Jack Merridew 07:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, in-universe description of fictional universe, apparently completely original research. Kusma (talk) 03:05, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. ++Lar: t/c 08:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, self-indulgent and unencyclopedic. Abductive (talk) 19:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete This is like having an article which describes every real world institution mentioned in some modern work of fiction (consider the silliness of Around the World in Eighty Days (Verne novel) having a paragraph describing every real world place mentioned), a little encyclopedia within an article, besides the fictional institutions. I grant that in a fiction franchise as vast as this, it would be useful to the reader to have a place to look up something mentioned in one story which is better explained in another story, so I hope it finds a home on Wikia. Edison (talk) 21:35, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, per nom, not notable, NOTPLOT. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete for preference or (possibly) merge back to 1632 series. If kept, it should be renamed to reflect the refernece to the novel series not the year 1632. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2009 (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.