Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barren planet

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barren planet

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

This is a piece of EVE Online fancruft masquerading as a science article. The only link defining this topic is to an EVE Online website. Serendi ^pod ous 23:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 February 5. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 23:34, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This term is common both in science fiction and reality when talking about planets. Three out of four planets in our solar system are barren planets——Mars, Venus, and Mercury. In the near future when more and more rocky exoplanets are found and diversify, then barren planets might be commonly discussed in scientific journals. Planet Star 23:55, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's just an adjective attached to a noun, no more acceptable than jungle planet. Ocean planet at least has some references to justify its existence. If it ever becomes a scientific classification, then we can talk, but not until then. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:11, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yes, it exists in science fiction and PC gaming, but is it notable? There's a big difference between popular and notable. When it becomes a notable topic, we can discuss it then. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' as lacking in-depth coverage in independent third party sources. Feel free to ping my talk page if such sources get added to the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Various scifi (games, literature, etc.) calling various things a barren planet isn't going to get us an encyclopedic article. At best it's going to be a List of barren planets in fiction. But I'm not sure that satisfies WP:LISTN. As for Mars, Venus, etc., the accepted scientific terminology is telluric planet or rocky planet. "Barren planet" is not even among the proposed sub-types of that. Some science texts use the term informally [1][2] but without even a proposed (let alone somewhat broadly accepted) definition in a science source, this article isn't getting off the ground per WP:GNG, etc. I can even find the term pretty planet in some introductory science books [3]. I hope nobody considers creating an article for that. (As a side-point, the Universe Today article cited [4] doesn't even use the word "barren", so the wiki article is also a case of WP:SYN.) Someone not using his real name (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Thought I'm aware of WP:PERNOM, I have to agree with Someone not using his real name's excellent outline. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 16:53, 11 February 2014 (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.