Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qagh

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 merge to Klingon culture#Gagh. MBisanz ^talk 03:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Qagh[edit]

I am not at all a deletionist, but this article is an abomination. It has a horridly unencylopedic tone, cites nothing, and is apparently under the purview of no one - in the last two and a half years, we've had someone bolding the article title, tagging it, vandalizing it, reverting that vandalism, SmackBot dating the tag, me PROD'ing it, the PROD removed by an anon, and then this AFD. That's it, for the last 33 months. I'll gladly withdraw this AFD if someone can roll up their sleeves and make something out of this article (I've got a little bit of a Trekkie streak to me, so I know what this article refers to, and I think it's at least possible that the subject is suitable for Wikipedia and not just Memory Alpha), but right now this article is a mess. If nothing else, deleting it will turn what it functionally is (a gaping hole) into what it truly is. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 04:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I've stubified this article, and although very short, it's now encyclopedic and sourced. LinguistAtLarge • Msg 04:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. I'd still prefer to let this take its course, to see if there's consensus that this topic is suitable for Wikipedia (or, at least, for its own independent article). Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 05:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. A completely separate issue is whether or not this meets the general notability guidelines. LinguistAtLarge • Msg 05:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete after merging information into a relevant article. Even after the cleanup and sourcing done, I don't see how the topic is notable enough to merit an article, though the information could possibly be added to another article. FaerieInGrey (talk) 06:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only existent article that seems remotely appropriate is List of Star Trek animals. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 06:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Unless there is a policy against articles on fictional food, which might be a good idea. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'Merge to Klingon language article? ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:15, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Klingon culture. WP:DICTDEF, especially not a Klingon-language dictionary. THF (talk) 18:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- NB Gagh redirect. THF (talk) 18:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note - The only possible issue I see here would be notability. In my opinion, WP:DICTDEF does not apply as this stub has the potential to grow quite a bit---it can discuss the dozens of different types of qagh, how to prepare it, describe the sauce and how it poisons the worms, talk about this dish's importance to the Klingon culture and its popularity. It can also discuss ways of preparing qagh with ingredients available on Earth (i.e., without the serpent worms) etc. If it were to be merged, I think Klingon culture would be a better target than Klingon language. LinguistAtLarge • Msg 03:01, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no real world significance or notability. Not every concept in the Star Trek universe get an article, just as not every concept in the real-life one does. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, otherwise merge and redirect to Klingon culture. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:15, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I just happened to stumble across this by accident, after reading an almost duplicated section in the Klingon Culture article. All I can say here is... wow... I don't really think there's anything to say that isn't reflected in the nom. Unencyclopedic: Check. Horribly written: Check. Sasuke9031 (talk) 08:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and/or redirect to Klingon culture#Gagh. Deletion is unwarranted as this is a reasonable and likely search term. DHowell (talk) 00:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, then merge and redirect to the appropriate place in Klingon culture#Cuisine —G716 <^T·_C> 02:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- —G716 <^T·_C> 02:25, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Klingon culture#Cuisine. - Fayenatic (talk) 21:04, 22 January 2009 (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.