Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ra Cailum class battleship

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 List_of_Mobile_Suit_Gundam_military_units#Ra_Cailum_class_battleship. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ra Cailum class battleship

No indication at all of real-world notability. Prod was removed under the [incorrect] assumption that I don't think this should be deleted. The article contains no content that isn't written in an in-universe style. Mr.Z-man 16:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just like this is not a star wars/star trek wiki, this is not a "insert random fictional universe here" wiki. Fuzbaby (talk) 17:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 18:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to
Universal Century or Earth Federation; di-orphan non-free image afterward. --EEMIV (talk) 18:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. —Calathan (talk) 19:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is just the tip of a massive Gundam Universal Century cleanup that is long overdo. I'm not exactly sure what to do with this article, but it will require a complete restructuring of UC articles into a series of lists. --Farix (Talk) 01:18, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
... as The Farix says. There is even a navtemplate ({{
relevant WikiProject? I ask because it'll take more than five days for the work to be done properly. A list of Gundanverse ships can demonstrate notability, as there are multiple books devoted to just that subject. —Quasirandom (talk) 03:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
- I would have no problem with a list, but as it stands, the content in the article is totally inappropriate for Wikipedia, so I'm not sure what there is to merge. Mr.Z-man 21:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - It would need trimming down to size during the merge, and then the list built up with out-of-universe sources. Not a quick project. (I note btw that content can be inappropriate for a separate article but completely appropriate as a subsection of a larger article or list --
    WP:N explicitly states this.) —Quasirandom (talk) 01:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    - List of Mobile Suit Gundam military units seems to be an appropriate target for merging. Right now, I'm trying to clean up the overlinking and converting the infoboxes to {{Infobox fictional vehicle}}. --Farix (Talk) 03:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to an appropriate list. Edward321 (talk) 00:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per Quasirandom. Extremepro (talk) 01:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per proposal. Certainly I can see the reason why it was nominated, character pages are another example of the type of page which is typically written in highly inappropriate manners for wikipedia. However the merge proposal above is the preferred way of dealing with it in this case (although it may not be in other cases). Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I also support the merge but as Quasirandom pointed out it will take time and the workload alone can burn fews editors. Gundam's articles are a major headache for the anime project for years so i don't think it will be solved in the instant. --KrebMarkt 07:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article has effectively been merged into List of Mobile Suit Gundam military units#Ra Cailum class battleship, all that is left is to redirect. --Farix (Talk) 12:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a decent target for now, pending the massive cleanup overhaul needed. I endorse this merge. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mobile Suit Gundam: Char's Counterattack, since that's where it appears first. Jtrainor (talk) 09:40, 29 July 2009 (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.