Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colonization of Mercury (2nd nomination)
- 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 ]
Colonization of Mercury
AfDs for this article:
Article was tagged for
WP:synthesis." It does not qualify for PROD since it was kept at AfD back in 2006, but as BatteryIncluded puts it on the talk page, "There is no way to improve on a topic that has not been assessed formally in the literature". This nomination is based on a request by BatteryIncluded on the article talk page and what looks to be a reasonable assessment of the article. I'll refrain from issuing my own !vote but will probably comment once I've had a chance to review the available sourcing on the matter. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:47, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:48, 27 November 2015 (UTC)]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:48, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. The only somewhat credible source is the article in External links by James Shifflett, a particle physicist,[1] not exactly an expert in the field. On the bright(?) side, he seems to have been plagiarized (or vice versa) by somebody named Alexander Balonkin,[2] based on the little I can see in Google Books; woo hoo. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. As I mentioned in the talk page, a search using a university database turned up absolutely nothing published with relevance to this topic. No significant entity is entertaining the colonization of Mercury as possible. Many of the statements in the article are unsupported and some of those are obviously false. Remove those statements and what remains is nothing more than an extremely cut down version of Mercury's main article. With these factors in mind, there is no reason for this article to exist and it should have been deleted last time. The arguments used for 'keep' in the last deletion discussion simply baffle me. UnitTwo (talk) 02:19, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to Space colonization#Mercury or delete. I found this article on Vice, but there doesn't seem to be a lot out there. Most of the hits I found were brief mentions of fictional colonies. This lack of sources seems to be reflected in the article, which is made up mostly of original research and synthesis. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect, but it's only a marginal preference over delete. De Guerre (talk) 23:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect, as suggested by NinjaRobotPirate, to Space colonization#Mercury. Due to the lack of reliable sources available, and the significant amount of original research presented in the current article, I don't think it warrants a separate page. Edgeweyes (talk) 15:06, 1 December 2015 (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.