- 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 redirect to BattleTech#Periphery. Now this one is interesting. Jclemens is correct when he pointed out the page was redirect following the last AFD, and it seems that he is arguing that it should be returned to that state. Except... the target was List of BattleTech locations that was later moved to Geography of the BattleTech universe; and as we see both of those pages are deleted due to the AFD discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geography of the BattleTech universe. I am therefore redirecting to Battletech#Periphery. Obviously, it is not feasible to merge the entire content into that article, but since the history will remain, anyone may merge whatever is appropriate. Sjakkalle (Check!) 17:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Periphery (BattleTech) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Removed PROD per WP:PROD (previous AfD exists). Reason given in PROD was: Giant, unsourced plot summary Illia Connell (talk) 03:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I am the PRODder, by the way. My mistake on using PROD. This article is incredibly bloated. It relies entirely on "Sourcebook"s (without proper citations) as sources and thus lacks reliable sources and assertion of notability. The article has more or less existed in its current state since 2010. This article was approved for deletion in December 2007 but based on page history it appears it was never deleted. It was approved for redirect and merge in 2010 but no one ever took the time to do that either but gradually restored over the next few years. Some guy (talk) 06:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I exported the entire history of this article to http://battletech.wikia.com/wiki/Periphery_%28BattleTech%29 in case anyone interested wishes to continue editing there. I ported over other articles of this series that have been deleted on Wikipedia over a year or so ago. Dream Focus 16:34, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The sad irony here is I started the BattleTech Wikia way back in 2006. I could never round up many contributors, and ending up abandoning the wiki in disappointment when it became clear there was a general preference for Sarna. I honestly had completely forgotten about it. I sort of wish I hadn't remembered, for some reason it's a pretty unhappy memory. Anyway, I left you a message there, please take a look at that it when you get a chance. Additionally, I wouldn't bother exporting pages to MechWikia, as Sarna has been the de facto BattleTech wiki for many years now. I just wish they'd change the color scheme... Some guy (talk) 06:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect and merge as appropriate. The nomination is incorrect: for about one month in 2010, the article lived on as a redirect after the 2nd AfD, then was apparently rebuilt by one of the previous contributors. Nothing appears to have been wrong in the process, but if the fictional element still isn't notable, it should be merged to one that is as long as such exist. Jclemens (talk) 07:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect and merge. While I'd prefer to see the article reworked and strengthened, it doesn't look like it's going to happen, and I agree that as-is it has a number of problems including a lack of third-party sources to establish notability. (And my experience with the topic makes me doubt whether such sources could be found.) I think the topic could be more succinctly covered as a sub-section within a broader and better-sourced BattleTech article. ╠╣uw [talk] 11:10, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I also copied this article to wikialpha, which is a wikipedia-like site which is less uptight about notability, and has a growing gaming article collection. Mathewignash (talk) 19:13, 7 March 2013 (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.