m (→Discussion: re) |
|||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
* While the pages may have some essay-ish qualities, the broad information presented within is valid and they should be '''kept''', but possibly rewritten (as required). -- [[User:Sulfur|sulfur]] 17:33, August 25, 2010 (UTC) |
* While the pages may have some essay-ish qualities, the broad information presented within is valid and they should be '''kept''', but possibly rewritten (as required). -- [[User:Sulfur|sulfur]] 17:33, August 25, 2010 (UTC) |
||
:I think any rewrite would trim these down to the point that there wouldn't really be a reason for them to be separate articles anymore. There aren't that many incoming links, so it wouldn't be too hard to just merge these into subsections of their respected species articles. That said, I wonder how much of the canon information in these isn't already covered at the species article? - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 17:47, August 25, 2010 (UTC) |
:I think any rewrite would trim these down to the point that there wouldn't really be a reason for them to be separate articles anymore. There aren't that many incoming links, so it wouldn't be too hard to just merge these into subsections of their respected species articles. That said, I wonder how much of the canon information in these isn't already covered at the species article? - {{User:Archduk3/Sig/nature}} 17:47, August 25, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| + | *'''Keep''': as long as everything that is claimed is cited by references to specific episodes/and or events (which seems to be the case in most of these), i dont see why these pages should be deleted or that they need to be reduced to a few lines. Fix the POV though. – [[User:Distantlycharmed|Distantlycharmed]] 17:55, August 25, 2010 (UTC) |
||
== Admin resolution == |
== Admin resolution == |
||
Revision as of 17:55, 25 August 2010
This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Human philosophy, Bajoran philosophy, Borg philosophy, Dominion philosophy, Hirogen philosophy, Klingon philosophy, Romulan philosophy, Vulcan philosophy".
- If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale".
- If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
- If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".
In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.
Deletion rationale
These pages are generally subjective essays which analyze or draw conclusions, are in the wrong POV, and full of speculation. - Archduk3 20:48, August 14, 2010 (UTC)
Discussion
I find myself in disagreement with Archduk3. Having read the article on Vulcan philosophy, I believe that it is in conformity to the established Star Trek canon and should be allowed to remain.Selek1 – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.205.15.49.- While the pages may have some essay-ish qualities, the broad information presented within is valid and they should be kept, but possibly rewritten (as required). -- sulfur 17:33, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I think any rewrite would trim these down to the point that there wouldn't really be a reason for them to be separate articles anymore. There aren't that many incoming links, so it wouldn't be too hard to just merge these into subsections of their respected species articles. That said, I wonder how much of the canon information in these isn't already covered at the species article? - Archduk3 17:47, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: as long as everything that is claimed is cited by references to specific episodes/and or events (which seems to be the case in most of these), i dont see why these pages should be deleted or that they need to be reduced to a few lines. Fix the POV though. – Distantlycharmed 17:55, August 25, 2010 (UTC)