Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ugnaughts

: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 No consensus to delete. A merge may be pursued editorially if desired. Eluchil404 (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

=[[Ugnaughts]]=

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

This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and is simply a repetition of various plot points from the the Star Wars media articles plot sections, and is therefore totally duplicative and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

See also

merge* with List of Star Wars races (U-Z). Not enough real world for full article, but s/b enough for a valid list entry. Umbralcorax (talk) 01:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Delete No reliable and independent sources to establish notability. Totally in-universe. Edison (talk) 02:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep per Wikipedia:Five pillars (notability to a real-world audience, unoriginal research, consistent with a “specialized encyclopedia” concerning verifiable fictional topics with importance in the real world) and What Wikipedia is. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Merge as per Umbralcorax. Edward321 (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep per several independently-written and independently-published [http://books.google.com/books?q=ugnaughts&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&um=1&sa=N&tab=np sources], both documentary and fictional, covering this subject, and per my comments in AfDs on other similar articles on Star Wars races. DHowell (talk) 03:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Merge per Umbralcorax (and I did meddle and bold Umbralcorax's vote for visual clarity). --Quartermaster (talk) 17:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

::Thanks, must've missed that. Umbralcorax (talk) 16:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Delete - entirely unreferenced plot summary. Create redirect to appropriate List of... (which is itself problematic) atop redlink. --EEMIV (talk) 18:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Redirectable material, especially of a [http://books.google.com/books?q=Ugnaughts notable and verifiable] subject, need not be deleted as well. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Ugnaughts are, as far as I know, only a background race in the Star Wars universe (Twi'leks and Gamorreans are, no matter the outcome there, far more significant). Listing name drops in books does not equal real world notability.
Merge to List of Star Wars races (U-Z)#Ugnaught. --Amalthea^Talk 10:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep Notability doesn't appear to be in question. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, yes it is, as per nom. Can you "demonstrate real-world notability from reliable sources" per WP:FICT (essay) or provide "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" per WP:NOTE? I can't. --Amalthea^Talk 20:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)'
Anything that gets [http://books.google.com/bkshp?hl=en&tab=wp&q=Ugnaughts this many] on topic hits in Google books passes even our heavily disputed notability essays and guidelines and demonstrates real-world notability from significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 07:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep as notable, unoriginally researched fancruft. Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 23:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Delete, does not appear to be notable outside the context of Star Wars. More appropriate to a specialist site like Wookieepedia. And yes, LGRdC, I know you think differently. Stifle (talk) 15:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Not just me, but thousands of readers, editors, and those arguing to keep here. They are notable to millions of people around the world due to their extensive appearances in comics, video games, films, toys, etc. Few fictional races have made so many appearances in such diverse media and are recognizable to so many. Any idea that they are not notable by whatever definition of that term is not consistent with the facts. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 22:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Since when do article topics have to be notable outside any particular context? I doubt that Chebotarev's density theorem has any notability outside the context of mathematics—should that article be deleted as well? Perhaps it is more appopriate for "Mathipedia". DHowell (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep per Stifle. I know he'll think I'm distorting his logic, but SWs notable enough that being notable within that context is sufficient here. I'd say them samea bout the major elements of any notable fiction. DGG (talk) 04:26, 19 August 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.