This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Revolution (physics)".

  • 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 Edit

Page has been uncited since creation 10 months ago AND no changes since then;furthermore no non-maintenance pages link to it, so unless someone can present an episode where the concept was named or featured prominently, delete it now. Kennelly 17:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion Edit

Agreed. This is a "trivial" description page for a concept that doesn't have any specific important Trek relation. Delete, and also delete the then useless Revolution (disambiguation). -- Cid Highwind 18:52, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It strikes me as a dictionary article that was meant to "offset" the other meaning of revolution... that we have an article on. Delete. :) -- Sulfur 19:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Is there really no reasonable canon reference for this? Some alien culture that referred to the passage of time in terms of planetary "revolutions" (akin to cycle)? Maybe in describing that weird planet from "Blink of an Eye"? It just seems incredible that there isn't some canon reference somewhere to a "revolution" (in the non-insurrection sense of the word)... --TommyRaiko 19:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. I found 2 references made with regards to the revolution of a planet, with all the rest of the references to the term 'revolution' being in reference to a political revolution (9), or a technological/industrial/medical revolution (10). For those keeping track, check out TNG: "The Dauphin" and VOY: "Blink of an Eye" for your two references, where one was in reference to a planet's revolution around its sun (=1 year): "Daled IV rotates only once per revolution"; and the other to a planet's own revolution (=1 day): "It also resembles a quasar in that it has a high rate of rotation, approximately 58 revolutions per minute." The only thing I don't like about the current article is the use of a qualifier, and think maybe we could rename this to something like orbital revolution, or even just merge it into a subsection of orbit. I'm sure this could be further expanded in you add references to a planet's "rotation" in this mix. --Alan 20:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

What I really don't like about this is the trend towards a dictionary instead of an encyclopedia. The more important, underlying concept re:Daled IV is already described at tidal locking, the fact that Kelemane's planet rotates more quickly than other planets is described there - what's left for the "revolution" article itself is just the trivial dictionary definition plus a list of episodes where that word was used. There's just no specific Trek meaning involved. Are we going to start articles for every word of the english language now?

EDIT: Please also keep in mind that the two references refer to different meanings of the word "revolution". Only one of them refers to what is called "orbital revolution". -- Cid Highwind 10:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess I should have clarified my keep as provisional, because yes, there is/are references to revolution, but no, we shouldn't be a dictionary, which is why I suggested that the information I introduced related to this be condensed or collected in a manner that this article apparently attempted to do. I guess it's just the inclusionist in me. ;)
With regards to M/A becoming a dictionary, I agree that it shouldn't, and our database probably needs some major weeding. My question is at what point we start that line and how far do we draw it? --Alan 10:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Admin resolution Edit

Deleted --Alan del Beccio 21:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)