Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unobtainium

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. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 00:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unobtainium[edit]

Unverified, fictional dictionary definition. There are two references that the term was used by the U.S. military as a euphamism for titanium. If true, that information could be added to the titanium article. The rest of this article is unverifiable, and also violates WP:NOT in that wikipedia is not a dictionary definition. Jayron 32 06:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Without looking to article I knew what it was going to be about (big sci-fi fan)... Does need rewrite and some references, but basic idea is OK.SkierRMH,07:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is pretty widely used in Sci-Fi, good to keep. Mets 08:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per SkierRMH. Sander123 10:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. It is unverified and thus needs some work, but it isn't unverifiable. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 11:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I've heard this used not only in sci-fi context, but also in an engineering context as well, and its not a neologism. This article seems to go beyond a mere dictionary definition to something that's likely worthy of encyclopedic inclusion. Wintermut3 14:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, expansion, encyclopedic word. Ter e nc e Ong 14:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Per comments. Sufficient content to be encyclopedic. — RJH (talk) 21:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This article is relevant, even though it is related to a peculiar (humorous?) expression. It is informative enough, so that people who come with a question will get an answer. Its style and formatting should be improved. The term "unobtainium" can be traced to many sci-fi authors; it has been used in popular science magazines as well. -- Hugo Dufort 01:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as per above. Appears often enough in science fiction to warrant an encyclopedia entry. — SolarianKnight 03:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the concept is useful and used all the time in engineering contexts. For example, if the cost/kg of orbiting a satellite can be reduced, then the satellites themselves would become much less expensive, since we'd no longer need to make them from the finest unobtainium.LouScheffer 22:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, It's probably necessary to keep this article though it does need some major revision. The article should approach from a more scientific/engineering point of view and then briefly mention the popular culture references at the end. The second mention of "The Core" use of unobtanium belongs in "The Core" article. jnagel 23:50, 7 December 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.