Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nations of Nineteen Eighty-Four

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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:28, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nations of Nineteen Eighty-Four

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I actually think this topic may be notable (sourcing like this and this was found relatively quickly) but the article as it stands is fancruft, only sourced to the book, and goes into more detail than an encyclopedia reasonably should (without any secondary sources). This painfully under-sourced mess should be a redirect' to Nineteen Eighty-Four#Political geography, which contains a reasonable amount of in-universe detail. I'm not opposed to withdrawing this AFD if the in-universe stuff is trimmed and secondary sources added, but as it stands there's no benefit from a stand-alone article. (note: coming to AFD for wider input after Deacon Vorbis and Michael Bednarek disagreed about whether to redirect or not) Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:55, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator based upon recent improvements, redirection is not merited any longer. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 12:28, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:03, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with nom, mostly. It also appears that each individual nation was merged into this single article not too long ago. It's drastically undersourced and, in the style of writing, currently has little encyclopaedic value and currently suffers from a bunch of WP:OR. I believe the topic itself is notable. I think it would've been appropriate to put some cleanup tags on the article, as well as leaving a message on the talk and of the talk of the main book article and seeing if anyone wants to clean it up. I'm not yet sure if it's WP:TNT worthy; there's plenty of stuff in here not in the main article, not all of it being fancruft. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect~~ as suggested by the nominator. This violates WP:NOTPLOT because it is an entirely in-universe description of a fictional work. Articles about fictional topics need to include at least some sort of real-world background, context or analysis. I'm sure enough people have written about Nineteen Eighty-Four for this to be possible but as it stands the article isn't encyclopedic. Hut 8.5 20:02, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep following the recent improvements. Hut 8.5 16:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak redirect~~ as suggested by the nominator; the topic itself does not seem to meet WP:NFICTION. That said, this work has a number of studies about it, and some sort of article about the fictional universe may be warranted, combining this and a number of other topics into one. Also, the topic may actually be notable, but the article is close to WP:TNT - unreferenced fancruft that needs to be gutted to the bone and replaced with content wee could verify; so I have no objections to this being kept if rewritten, or recreated with sources in the future. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:23, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Thank you Eddie891 for the ping, I have updated my vote. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The history of this article goes back to 2004. As others here have observed, it's clearly a notable subject and this article goes beyond what's in the main article. The content here is indeed unsourced and is technically OR, but it doesn't seem to contain any obvious POV howlers. It can be improved. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:22, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per WP:NOTCLEANUP. Would not be opposed to an overall merge to some Universe of Nineteen Eighty-Four article, but the subject seems notable._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 12:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
comment based on Serial Number 54129’s great expansion, my concerns and most likely those of Piotrus and Hut 8.5 have been resolved, and I’d be happy to withdraw this nomination. Best wishes, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:37, 28 June 2020 (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.