- 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 List of fictional aircraft mostly as a procedural closure. Even though this AfD wasn't added to the logs until a few days ago, the merge has stood for over a month (AfD tag on the resulting redirect included), so I don't see any point in keeping this discussion open. ansh 666 00:27, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
List of fictional military aircraft
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of fictional military aircraft ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Portions of the article lacks notability and is a duplicate of the page - FOX 52 ( talk) 23:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Only in the opinion of the nominator does it lack notability. I will see if I can add some sources to it, but if the nominator will continue on removing information so that it will be deleted quicker he got everything wrong. I propose merge at least. I also would like to ping @ AHMED XIV:, a person who had some dialogue with this editor in the past to sort out this, unethical, in my opinion nomination.-- Biografer ( talk) 01:12, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- The burden of proof lies with editor who's adding content per
WP:PROVEIT - further as stated "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source" per
WP:BURDEN The article clean up tag has been there since 2010 -
FOX 52 (
talk) 02:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- This is exactly what I was doing before you did another 7 edits after you put that tag. I don't care if the tag is there or not. As I said earlier merge proposition without PROD would have been a better solution, but you just want to start a discussion via this template instead of discussing it on the article talkpage. In fact, nobody had a problem with the article, only you did.-- Biografer ( talk) 03:43, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- The burden of proof lies with editor who's adding content per
WP:PROVEIT - further as stated "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source" per
WP:BURDEN The article clean up tag has been there since 2010 -
FOX 52 (
talk) 02:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep It's not a duplicate of that page. List of fictional aircraft is all fictional aircraft. This article is an expanded List of fictional military aircraft, this being the main article of the section at List of fictional aircraft. Furthermore, portions being non notable don't mean delete the entire article. Vermont ( talk) 09:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete all the relevant cited information can be or is included in List of fictional aircraft no need for a seperate list for military related fiction. MilborneOne ( talk) 18:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
- @ MilborneOne: Maybe not, but Wikipedia do have {{ See also}} and {{ Main}} templates for a reason.-- Biografer ( talk) 01:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- I cant see the relevance to this discussion they would not be needed as they would not have or likely to need a target article.
MilborneOne (
talk) 21:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- @
MilborneOne: It currently does use a {{
Main}} template in the
List of fictional aircraft. On the overall list, each topic is a sentence, where on the article up for deletion here, each topic is a paragraph or more.
Vermont (
talk) 22:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- @ Vermont: and @ Biografer: - As a solution to this problem I recommend we take all the relevant content from this article and transfer it over to the List of fictional aircraft page, and that way everyone get to keep their input - FOX 52 ( talk) 01:36, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- @
MilborneOne: It currently does use a {{
Main}} template in the
List of fictional aircraft. On the overall list, each topic is a sentence, where on the article up for deletion here, each topic is a paragraph or more.
Vermont (
talk) 22:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- I cant see the relevance to this discussion they would not be needed as they would not have or likely to need a target article.
MilborneOne (
talk) 21:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of fictional aircraft, since this list is a duplicate. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 21:07, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment This discussion was created without the {{ afd2}} template and nver transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I have no opinion on the nomination itself. -- Finngall talk 09:48, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Merge The contested article meets the standards for an independent article in Wikipedia but, since a List of fictional aircraft exists, the best way forward is to merge this text, with almost all content intact, into the bigger list. - The Gnome ( talk) 10:58, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 11:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 11:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 11:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Like parent article List of fictional aircraft, it has been WP:BOMBARDed with "sources" but few to none of them are reliable or actually about the aircraft in question. Pure listcruft. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 04:47, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
- 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.