Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exosquad planets

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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 23:33, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exosquad planets

This is a trivial grouping of minor elements from Exosquad that does not establish independent notability through the inclusion of real world information from reliable, third party sources. Most of the information is made up of original research and unnecessary plot details. There is no current assertion for future improvement of the article, so extended coverage is unnecessary. TTN (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- non-notable and original research. Xihr 01:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep proper and appropriate combination article for minor plot elements. DGG (talk) 06:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It would be too large to include in the main Exosquad article (so it's a valid spin-off Subarticle and it helps prevent fragmentation by creation of multiple short articles. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT as in-universe cruft. Eusebeus (talk) 19:37, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Standard spinoff article to keep main article from growing too large. Edward321 (talk) 00:32, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not establish notability through significant coverage of real world context in reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. It is not an appropriate combination article because the items are not collectively notable. It is also not an appropriate subarticle, per WP:AVOIDSPLIT, as well as Wikipedia:Subarticle#No need for haste, Wikipedia:Subarticle#Breaking out trivial or controversial sections, and Wikipedia:Subarticle#Breaking out an unwanted section. When content isn't properly sourced it should be removed, not given its own article. Jay32183 (talk) 03:31, 18 December 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.