Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/22nd century in fiction

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22nd century in fiction[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Same scope as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th millennium in fiction and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Far future in fiction for a different time period. -- Beland (talk) 08:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 08:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:14, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Indiscriminate listcruft with no clear criteria for inclusion. This only really works as a category._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 12:30, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Merge~~ into 22nd century - Definitely shouldn't have its own article, but there is some information here that could be value of the parent article. Foxnpichu (talk) 16:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In response to some recent !votes, I'm going to go for a Redirect instead. Foxnpichu (talk) 23:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Much like the mentioned Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th millennium in fiction, there are really no reliable sources that discuss the specific time period as an overall group or concepts that would allow for a proper article to be created, and this current mess of a list is nothing but an almost entirely unsourced list of pop culture WP:TRIVIA. As such, there definitely should not be a merge to the actual 22nd century article. Rorshacma (talk) 17:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above, there needs to be specific RS discussin this topic, not things cobbled together from related articles. Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This might be worth while if we could create a sourced article on it, but it has no purpose as a stand alone list.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Would need RSes that actually discuss the 22nd century as represented in fiction. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG and WP:NOT#PLOT because this topic is fundamentally misconstructed as a list of primary sourced trivia. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:47, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4th millennium in fiction and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Far future in fiction, as suggested by nom. These articles are collections of trivial unsourced references, with no third-party sources to establish notability. Jontesta (talk) 16:07, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yet another indiscriminate list of pop-culture trivia with no unifying theme except setting, which for the most part is usually irrelevant to the plot. Or, as the TV Tropes community would call it, "People Sit on Chairs". Also, there's no sign of meeting WP:LISTN. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:34, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Too much fancruft, too little encyclopedic value. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:25, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per nom --Devokewater (talk) 09:48, 8 October 2020 (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.