Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sector (Star Trek)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. - Philippe 20:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sector (Star Trek)[edit]
- Sector (Star Trek) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This article asserts no notability through reliable sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot points from the Star Trek series. It is therefore both duplicative and trivial, and should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Article itself even admits it is non-canon. L0b0t (talk) 23:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Tentative delete - a few Trek spoofs have goofed on sector names/numbers/weirdness, but I doubt in any sort of critical mass, or in any sort of spoof-centric way, to yield reliable third-party coverage. Any passing references to spoofs' sectors could likely be rolled into Star Trek or Cultural impact of Star Trek#Parodies and tributes. --EEMIV (talk) 07:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This is a useful way of organizing the material. Encyclopedias can cover subjects from multiple viewpoints & aspects-- and we are NOT PAPER. DGG (talk) 23:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This Star Trek cruft belongs elsewhere. No notability is shown, and it just appears to be Star Trek trivia/cruft. RobJ1981 (talk) 19:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete - I would be more inclined to keep if there was canonical referencing because this does come up a lot in the films/series. As it is, it almost becomes anti-useful. LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:00, 6 July 2008 (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.