Talk:Movellan Incident: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m (Scrooge MacDuck moved page Talk:Battle for the Movellan ship to Talk:Movellan Incident) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Prop Delete== | ==Prop Delete== | ||
===Rationale=== | ===Rationale=== | ||
See | See Talk:Skirmish at Tranquil Repose. This is flatly absurd. This kind of article needs to be rooted out of this wiki. Except in very rare cases articles should not be created for events or things that have no names. Battles in particular do not deserve their own names/pages unless the name is given in a primary source. | ||
===Poll=== | ===Poll=== | ||
====For Deletion==== | ====For Deletion==== | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
#[[User:Dark Lord Xander|Dark Lord Xander]] 23:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Whilst i am for the deletion of articles that have no real name and little information on them this one has sufficient information for me to believe it should stay | #[[User:Dark Lord Xander|Dark Lord Xander]] 23:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Whilst i am for the deletion of articles that have no real name and little information on them this one has sufficient information for me to believe it should stay | ||
#[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 14:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC) After having a think about this one it fulfils everything the a 'battle' is defined as (that was my sticking point that it didn't qualify as a 'battle'), but there are objectives, combatants. The article still isn't perfect, but it's in a good state to be improved. | #[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 14:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC) After having a think about this one it fulfils everything the a 'battle' is defined as (that was my sticking point that it didn't qualify as a 'battle'), but there are objectives, combatants. The article still isn't perfect, but it's in a good state to be improved. | ||
#[[User:Quark16|Quark16]] - 23:20, 10 August 2008(UTC) For the name of god dont delete this page | #[[User:Quark16|Quark16]] - 23:20, 10 August 2008(UTC) For the name of god dont delete this page . Its a lot of info ! could help people ! | ||
===Decision=== | ===Decision=== | ||
With four votes against deletion the prop delete has been removed, however as a cleanup tag has been added as article needs some improving. Discussion on the name can continue without the prop delete tag. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 15:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | With four votes against deletion the prop delete has been removed, however as a cleanup tag has been added as article needs some improving. Discussion on the name can continue without the prop delete tag. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 15:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 12:59, 12 March 2022
Prop Delete[[edit source]]
Rationale[[edit source]]
See Talk:Skirmish at Tranquil Repose. This is flatly absurd. This kind of article needs to be rooted out of this wiki. Except in very rare cases articles should not be created for events or things that have no names. Battles in particular do not deserve their own names/pages unless the name is given in a primary source.
Poll[[edit source]]
For Deletion[[edit source]]
Against Deletion[[edit source]]
- Skittles the hog - This unlike some pages is an actual battle and so deserves a page.
- Steed 15:52, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Thank you Tangerineduel. The article is nicely padded because I improved it. I can improve Skirmish at Tranquil Repose as well.
- Dark Lord Xander 23:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Whilst i am for the deletion of articles that have no real name and little information on them this one has sufficient information for me to believe it should stay
- Tangerineduel 14:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC) After having a think about this one it fulfils everything the a 'battle' is defined as (that was my sticking point that it didn't qualify as a 'battle'), but there are objectives, combatants. The article still isn't perfect, but it's in a good state to be improved.
- Quark16 - 23:20, 10 August 2008(UTC) For the name of god dont delete this page . Its a lot of info ! could help people !
Decision[[edit source]]
With four votes against deletion the prop delete has been removed, however as a cleanup tag has been added as article needs some improving. Discussion on the name can continue without the prop delete tag. --Tangerineduel 15:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
