Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-A)

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 speedy keep. Per WP:SK1, criteria 1: the nominator is not proposing a deletion action, but rather, a merge. Wikipedia:Proposed mergers details how controversial merger proposals should be undertaken. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:30, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-A)[edit]

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

I suggested a merge for this to Starship Enterprise, as this movie-only version of Enterprise not received significant independent coverage and pretty clearly fail Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). It is discussed primarily by primary sources and is already much better covered at MemoryAlpha wikia. However, as someone strongly objected on article talk to the merge, it is time to start a discussion here. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:17, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge This one is a difficult one, because I'm not sure where the article should be merged to. Starship Enterprise is one option, but simply merging it into the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) article is another, since the designers simply re-used the same model again. But this is likely to receive further mentions in the future - after all the Kelvin Timeline's 1701-A came into existence at the end of Beyond. For the moment this can be merged somewhere, and be reviewed if that coverage is then generated in the future from the next film. Miyagawa (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think merge is a fair option, but I wonder if the argument needs to be stronger than saying that this is only a movie Enterprise. True it only appeared on-screen in three films (with an alternate version in the latest film), but it did appear in comics and books and had models made of it. It also could be argued that the Death Star has only appeared in three films. As a side note I would also point out there are some Babylon 5 ships which appeared in one or two episodes only which have full articles eg EAS Churchill. Dunarc (talk) 14:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that the Death Star has had an impact on popular culture yes, but that article is analogous to Starship Enterprise rather than the 1701-A - I don't believe we have an article about the Death Star from RotJ specifically. And one must avoid arguments that X exists therefore Y must also. The question is does the A (and the E) have a notability that extends beyond "the Enterprise", and honestly I'm not sure it does. As regards books etc, non-canon stuff is generally given short shrift here, but most books don't specifically state which Enterprise it is, given that Kirk was captain of two (arguably three if you consider the refit). -mattbuck (Talk) 17:00, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunarc: Per Matt and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, the relevance of those B5 article is null. Please go ahead and prod or AfD them. As much as I like B5, perhaps even more than ST, they fail notability even more. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:09, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks both for your response - I think you are right and merge would be would be appropriate. Dunarc (talk) 21:05, 19 January 2017 (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.