Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Primortals

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 keep. Luna Santin 08:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Primortals[edit]

Unsure as to notability, and very short article, however uneasy to use {{nocontext}} if article has potential. haz (talk) e 08:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails to assert notability. MER-C 09:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Well, the notability is that it was an 15-issue comic book series by someone who is himself notable. Two someones if we work Isaac Asimov into it, since Nimoy credited discussions with him as helping develop the story. I wouldn't do more than one article for the whole series, but since it did make some news at the time, I'd keep it. FrozenPurpleCube 13:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the article is only a few days old. A little time for folks to expand it would be appreciated. FrozenPurpleCube 14:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Move to Leonard Nimoy Notability doesn't "leak over". Star Trek is notable on its own (!), not this as far as I can tell. There's an entry about Nimoy and that's the perfect place to write succinctly about his work beyond acting in Star Trek. Equendil Talk 19:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iffy about that, for a few reasons. One, the Nimoy article is already plenty big. Two, the discussion of the story itself wouldn't belong there anyway, and three, there are some questions as to Nimoy's involvement in the series. FrozenPurpleCube 23:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Come on, I know fiction notability is hotly contested, but two of the biggest names in science fiction collaborating plus SETI? Maybe not articles for each comic, but one for the whole series seems very reasonable and very notable to me. Guyanakoolaid 09:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the subject appears be a comic book series, a novel and a related CD-ROM, with some media coverage. See here for review of the CD-ROM, and here for the book. I think it's notable enough for a short article. -Kubigula (ave) 18:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both links are dead. Equendil Talk 18:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Same dumb mistake on both. Now fixed. -Kubigula (ave) 18:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Equendil Talk 19:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ the article fails to note that Nimoy didn't write the book. He was credited as a "creator" and used to market the book, just like everything else they published. It's worth a mention on Nimoy's page, but the book in and of itself isn't all that significant. Watchsmart 12:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

clarifying: The publisher, Teknocomix paid celebrities a lot of money to "create" some "concepts" for comic books. They then passed the the book onto someone to write. They had "Issac Asimov's Ibots" and "Neil Gaiman's Mr. Hero," and even "Gene Roddenbury's Lost Universe," (though G.R. had died some years earlier). Nimoy's involvement with the book was quite limited. The book was sort of alright, though. Watchsmart 02:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like details that would be worth adding to the Tekno Comix article, and this one. I was tempted to do so, but lacked sources. If you've got some, it'd be appreciated. BTW, "A novelization was written by Steve Perry" has been part of the article for several days, and the Nimoy one for even longer. FrozenPurpleCube 01:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the Primortals article. At the very least, we can take down the "expand" tag. I suppose, also, that we can Keep the article... Nimoy + 27 issues + book is probably more noteable than a lot of other things in Wikipedia. Perhaps the Tekno Comix article doesn't make stuff clear enough about the creation process. I will take a look. Watchsmart 10:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the two people who wrote the debut issue are prominent enough to have entries themselves. Watchsmart 10:51, 28 September 2006 (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.