- 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 Babylon 5. I take note of the clear consensus that this looks like a poorly sourced WP:OR mess and remind anyone engaged in the merge that only properly sourced material may be kept. Ad Orientem ( talk) 04:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Babylon 5 influences ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · 5 influences Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I would like to explain my nominating this article for deletion. I spent a great deal of time trying to find citations for the claims made in this article, and while I was successful in some cases, the vast majority of them are unsupported claims of similarity between the series and other works of fiction, or historical events, and not all are of sufficiently notable status.
Many of these claims may well be correct, and certainly seem plausible. Others are so vague and/or tenuous so as to make finding citations - when one is not the source of the edit - virtually impossible. In either case, without reliable sources I don't believe Wikipedia is the place for them. As pointed out on the talk page the article is a scattered mess anyway, and little better than a listicle in some places. There are plenty of B5 fan sites that point out perceived literary and historical parallels that don't have the same burdens for inclusion as Wikipedia.
In summary the portions of this article for which I could find sources are so few that what is left does not warrant a separate article. I have gathered together the elements for which I could find sources, and put them under a new 'Influences' heading in the main Babylon 5 article. I believe that removes the need to keep this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElectricalTill ( talk • contribs)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Purge and Merge, per nom. Aside from JMS's statements acknowledging the show's homages and inspirations, there are very few WP:RS references available for this. It's a great topic for a paper, but as a textbook example of WP:OR, it doesn't belong on WP. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 14:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Article constantly quotes a "James Michael Straczynski," and I don't think Wikipedia needs an exhaustive list of all the inspirations of any media. Jeb3 Talk at me here 16:27, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Jason A. Quest. The majority of the article is, as said, largely OR, and the actual cited elements (the statements from JMS himself, mostly) don't really need an article separate from the main Babylon 5 article. I was initially going to suggest merging those actual relevant bits of information to the main article, but I see that has already been done, and a must more succinct and better organized section with this information has already been created there. That being said, there is no reason to do anything here than a Deletion at this point. 169.232.162.112 ( talk) 19:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Don't delete it, just replace it with a redirect to the main article. Anyone can then go and merge over anything worth merging whenever they feel like getting around to it. Dream Focus 01:59, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment. I've moved and consolidated everything I could cite. I haven't checked printed literature, which may have usable sources, but a good few pages of google searches with various terms for each of the major claims. Most of it seems to be OR, conjecture, or claims so nebulous ("it seems," "a parallelization that can be made," "this is reminiscent of," "are similar to," "is often compared to," etc.) that it's difficult to even begin trying to find sources. Even citations from major sites like the Lurker's Guide are dubious IMO unless they're actually quoting JMS. ElectricalTill ( talk) 10:02, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom and taking into account comment above that anything salvagable/mergable has been done (otherwise I would redirect, but wary that some redirects become resurrected). The WP:OR issue is just too great here – both in terms of the topic (how can it ever avoid OR), and even the text, so it is beyond a WP:TNT issue. You could imagine some material being salvaged in a short section on a Babylon 5 article under an "Influences" section (e.g. "Experts regard the following list as important influences on Bablyon 5 ......") that might be sufficiently brief that it is uncontraversial; although, it could still attract OR concerns if the experts are not the accepted experts. Not for a full seperate article. Britishfinance ( talk) 20:47, 15 February 2019 (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.
- 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 Babylon 5. I take note of the clear consensus that this looks like a poorly sourced WP:OR mess and remind anyone engaged in the merge that only properly sourced material may be kept. Ad Orientem ( talk) 04:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Babylon 5 influences ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · 5 influences Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I would like to explain my nominating this article for deletion. I spent a great deal of time trying to find citations for the claims made in this article, and while I was successful in some cases, the vast majority of them are unsupported claims of similarity between the series and other works of fiction, or historical events, and not all are of sufficiently notable status.
Many of these claims may well be correct, and certainly seem plausible. Others are so vague and/or tenuous so as to make finding citations - when one is not the source of the edit - virtually impossible. In either case, without reliable sources I don't believe Wikipedia is the place for them. As pointed out on the talk page the article is a scattered mess anyway, and little better than a listicle in some places. There are plenty of B5 fan sites that point out perceived literary and historical parallels that don't have the same burdens for inclusion as Wikipedia.
In summary the portions of this article for which I could find sources are so few that what is left does not warrant a separate article. I have gathered together the elements for which I could find sources, and put them under a new 'Influences' heading in the main Babylon 5 article. I believe that removes the need to keep this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ElectricalTill ( talk • contribs)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 13:55, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Purge and Merge, per nom. Aside from JMS's statements acknowledging the show's homages and inspirations, there are very few WP:RS references available for this. It's a great topic for a paper, but as a textbook example of WP:OR, it doesn't belong on WP. - Jason A. Quest ( talk) 14:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Article constantly quotes a "James Michael Straczynski," and I don't think Wikipedia needs an exhaustive list of all the inspirations of any media. Jeb3 Talk at me here 16:27, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Jason A. Quest. The majority of the article is, as said, largely OR, and the actual cited elements (the statements from JMS himself, mostly) don't really need an article separate from the main Babylon 5 article. I was initially going to suggest merging those actual relevant bits of information to the main article, but I see that has already been done, and a must more succinct and better organized section with this information has already been created there. That being said, there is no reason to do anything here than a Deletion at this point. 169.232.162.112 ( talk) 19:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- Don't delete it, just replace it with a redirect to the main article. Anyone can then go and merge over anything worth merging whenever they feel like getting around to it. Dream Focus 01:59, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment. I've moved and consolidated everything I could cite. I haven't checked printed literature, which may have usable sources, but a good few pages of google searches with various terms for each of the major claims. Most of it seems to be OR, conjecture, or claims so nebulous ("it seems," "a parallelization that can be made," "this is reminiscent of," "are similar to," "is often compared to," etc.) that it's difficult to even begin trying to find sources. Even citations from major sites like the Lurker's Guide are dubious IMO unless they're actually quoting JMS. ElectricalTill ( talk) 10:02, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom and taking into account comment above that anything salvagable/mergable has been done (otherwise I would redirect, but wary that some redirects become resurrected). The WP:OR issue is just too great here – both in terms of the topic (how can it ever avoid OR), and even the text, so it is beyond a WP:TNT issue. You could imagine some material being salvaged in a short section on a Babylon 5 article under an "Influences" section (e.g. "Experts regard the following list as important influences on Bablyon 5 ......") that might be sufficiently brief that it is uncontraversial; although, it could still attract OR concerns if the experts are not the accepted experts. Not for a full seperate article. Britishfinance ( talk) 20:47, 15 February 2019 (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.