Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spacecraft in Red Dwarf

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. No independent sources and the only Keep argument was WP:OTHERSTUFF. RL0919 (talk) 14:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Spacecraft in Red Dwarf

[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)

This article is a list of in-universe minutia. These are details irrelevant to the casual reader, more suited to Fandom or another fan wiki. While not currently even present in this article, any details on the modeling the ships could easily fit inside Red Dwarf#Production. I don't think there is any argument to describe this as a necessary fork. The only one that could be described as important to the series would be the main ship, but that does not need more than a small paragraph unless there is real world information somewhere out there. The rest of the information is way too in-depth, and it does not need to be merged. TTN (talk) 14:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 14:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 14:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. TTN (talk) 14:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- I like Red Dwarf, but this really is excessive fancruft. Fortunately there are sites like Wikia to take elaborate, but ultimately unencyclopedic, labours of love. Reyk _YO! 18:19, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. 99% of these fan lists have to go, and probably the other 1% too. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a classic case of deletioncruft. This encyclopedic content is definitely worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. --199.123.13.2 (talk) 21:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC) blocked sock Reyk _YO! 06:16, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No less appropriate for Wikipedia than lists of minor characters in television series, of which there are hundreds. Trimming might be required of the excess detail, but it's still not too fancrufty a list. If the consensus is to delete, then merging an abridged form into the main article would be worthwhile. Grutness...wha? 02:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If ships equate to the same importance as characters, what is the cut off point? When is something too trivial to cover in detail? TTN (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:LISTN and is sourced entirely to primary sources._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 12:31, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Grutness. Also AfD is not for cleanup. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:22, 1 December 2019 (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.