Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Adventures of Captain Proton

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. Keep section didn't have one policy based reason Secret ^account 21:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Adventures of Captain Proton

This minor fictional topic has no real world notability asserted Ejfetters 06:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It is a significant thread of the Star Trek: Voyager stories. Anthony Appleyard 07:02, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- But the article has no "real-world" notability. It needs real-world information as its primary information, and I doubt enough real-world information can be found that it can stand on its own. The article is presently only in-universe information. Ejfetters 07:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Ejfetters; this is not StarTrekPedia.com, there must be some establishment of notability in the real_world to have an article standing on its own. Epthorn 09:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It is somewhat relevant as a commentary on 1950's and 1960's real space stories. Anthony Appleyard 09:29, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For Wikipedia purposes, real-world notability means acknowledgment by the real world of the element of fiction. What has been published by reliable sources about Captain Proton independent of Voyager plot summary? • Gene93k 14:54, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Over 20 pages point to it. If it must be deleted, can it be replaced by a stub with a pointer to http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/The_Adventures_of_Captain_Proton ? Anthony Appleyard 17:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not a major aspect of Star Trek and no significant coverage in independent sources. - Chardish 17:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It is actually a primary component of several Star Trek Voyager episodes - a real world sci-fi series. Deleting this page would represent a biased choice regarding what aspects of the Star Trek universe deserve representation on Wikipedia. Its inclusion in said universe cannot be countermanded and thus it deserves continued existence. User:Enmerkar04 11:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The Captain Proton game was a significant part of two, maybe three, episodes. Beyond that, it was the holodeck-backdrop-of-the-season, a minor subplot. It was minor to the overall ST: Voyager story and gets little notice from the real world as an independent work of fiction. • Gene93k (talk) 12:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(comment changed to vote) • Gene93k (talk) 04:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Granted, it isn't the biggest of all things, but where every episode has a Wikipedia entry, how is a major focus of multiple episodes any less notable? If we're going to delete things like Captain Proton and Section 31, which are larger than single episodes, we might as well go and PROD or DEL tag every episode entry and simply make "List of Star Trek: _______ episodes". VigilancePrime (talk) 00:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further, has anyone looked at Category:Metafictional characters? I mean, I know that just because Other Stuff Exists, but look at the slew of similar and yet less-used characters that are just as decent of articles. They all have interest value, as does this one. Think Emperor Zurg, Mooby the Golden Calf, Squiddy Awards, Captain Astro, and Reptar! This isn't OSE, it's precedent. Can we all come down off the recent deletionist movement? None of these articles has vast real-world notability or references, but each is minimally worthy of some mention here. Remember, we're not bound by paper-encyclopedia limits. VigilancePrime (talk) 00:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to remark that it seems like this is relying a little heavily on WP:OTHERSTUFF for my taste...Epthorn (talk) 08:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but remember "This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it." (emphasis added) VigilancePrime (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It is as informative as any other article about individual characters or other notable content from popular culture topics. I see no reasons for deletion. 74.132.200.129 (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge if it is important for the series, otherwise delete. No assertion of real-world notability. – sgeureka ^t•c 07:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per VigilancePrime. Showers (talk) 07:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge - As per VigilancePrime. Its notable within the Star Trek universe to at least have some detail, I would also argue that since the articles already here it may as well be left alone rather than merged. --Bisected8 (talk) 04:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless referenced with reliable, independent sources. Just because Star Trek is notable, it does not make every plot setting notable. Nuttah (talk) 21:28, 9 December 2007 (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.