395:
be malevolent, or they might be indifferent) followed by an enormous crufty list of examples, none of which are sourced in any way that demonstrates that they are good examples of an elder race. If we could strip this down to a couple of paragraphs of well sourced content then I would 100% agree with merging it into a related article or one of the "list of fantasy plot elements" type articles, but I'm simply not seeing any such content here.
565:, examples. But, that's assuming there are enough reliable sources actually discussing the concept itself to establish notability. While there are plenty of examples of the term being used, the book mentioned above, which is actually already included in the article, is the only one I've found that actually discusses and describes the concept in-depth.
394:
I don't think there's anything here worth merging. We have an unsourced introduction that is mostly self-contradictory waffling that reads like someone trying to add 200 extra words to a college essay (An elder race might be extinct, or they might not. An elder race might be benevolent, or they might
354:
is a couple of pages long, with a "survey" and a short following discussion, binding the themes together (mostly visible in Google Books). I didn't get any real in-depth additional articles on it while quickly glancing at Google
Scholar, but the term did turn up often enough to indicate that this is
703:
The sources indicate notability, and there are apparently more available. Though I have never really encountered the idea of elders as more decadent than humans, as cited in the article. Being "elder" is typically used to depict these races as more experienced or advanced, not regardless of whether
322:
Delete. I too tried to find RS for this subject. I felt like there must be some literary criticism somewhere, but it does seem to be fancruft. And believe me, I'm a fan. I searched expecting I'd find something in scholarship. (Note I'm travelling with bad internet, so I didn't do an exhaustive
624:
I agree that I think it's entirely possible to keep this article just based on the sources that have been listed so far, without even having to go to further references. This is clearly an established concept used in academic literature and discussions.
294:
202:
645:
also contains a bibliography of additional sources! So I really hope the closer of this discussion will discount all votes based on "not notable" without explanation or with "no sources" as explanation.
266:
665:
By deleting it, you will incur the wrath of the Elders! Real talk though, it's a notable subject mentioned in two encyclopedias of science fiction and a very common trope in fantasy and sci-fi.
561:- If this were to be kept in any form, I would actually propose the opposite of the Nominator's suggestion - rewrite the lede as prose information, and delete the list of unsourced, mostly
237:
content is available, but nothing published that provides more than a passing mention. No sources cited in the article. An alternative might be to remove the current lede, move to
163:
196:
520:
candidate since experience has shown that leaving cruft around obstructs the writing of an encyclopedia article rather than acting as a platform for improvement.
95:
110:
538:
I have eliminated all original research in the article and it is now fully sourced. While it was definitely a TNT candidate, that is fixed now.
90:
83:
17:
396:
582:
and improve. Huh, what's going on? Two secondary sources have been found which treat this in significant detail, i.e. one page in
136:
131:
104:
100:
140:
217:
730:
184:
40:
123:
481:
307:
279:
251:
602:, and a second one has been found? The fact that the current state is not good is no reason for deletion, as
178:
598:. What's with all the "there are no secondary sources", when there clearly was one already in the article
468:
473:
238:
726:
400:
36:
380:? Though I see that’s already offloaded it’s “in popular culture” section to a sprawling list article.
174:
713:
695:
678:
655:
634:
615:
574:
551:
533:
506:
485:
430:
404:
389:
368:
340:
314:
286:
258:
65:
477:
415:
234:
570:
298:
270:
242:
210:
443:
224:
709:
651:
611:
455:
377:
336:
672:
545:
424:
323:
search. I'll try again when I get home and see if anything turns up. If it does, I'll revise.)
79:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
725:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
233:
No indication of any independent, reliable sources discussing the trope as a trope; lots of
61:
603:
595:
517:
494:
447:
53:
691:
630:
364:
127:
562:
414:. OR, not a notable topic, maybe something for TVTropes or urban dictionary, but at best
355:
a concept they assume the reader to be familiar with and which is in academic use. Ping
190:
566:
527:
385:
705:
647:
607:
502:
459:
356:
352:
The
Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy: Themes, Works, and Wonders
350:, attempting to list the typical features. The entry listed under "Literature", from
332:
241:, and establish a clear standard for inclusion that could be laid out in a new lede.
668:
541:
452:
If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page.
420:
439:
347:
157:
57:
687:
626:
360:
119:
71:
521:
381:
498:
516:- unsourced fancruft. Even if the topic is notable, this is a clear
295:
list of
Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions
721:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
497:, so even removing the OR wouldn't help this stand on its own.
472:
in a wiki way so that all attention and effort is consumed by
442:. This demonstrates that it's feasible to write one; that
606:, which isn't even difficult, just needs (a lot of) work.
643:
The
Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy
588:
The
Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy
267:
list of
Fictional elements-related deletion discussions
153:
149:
145:
209:
466:everybody?" Perhaps they are all busy editing the
454:" There are plenty of other related pages such as
223:
686:, the article has now been completely rewritten. /
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
733:). No further edits should be made to this page.
462:. The latter really is a major puzzle – "where
440:respectable encyclopedia article about the topic
293:Note: This discussion has been included in the
265:Note: This discussion has been included in the
56:, sources were found to improve the article.
8:
446:has not been done properly; and that policy
111:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
292:
264:
376:would it be worth exploring a merge with
704:they are protagonists or antagonists.
456:Ancient_astronauts#In_popular_culture
421:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
584:The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction
24:
96:Introduction to deletion process
438:It didn't take long to find a
1:
586:and two-and-a-half pages in
714:20:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
696:16:43, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
679:11:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
656:07:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
635:20:10, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
616:15:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
575:15:32, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
552:16:00, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
534:12:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
507:11:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
486:09:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
431:05:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
348:The Encyclopedia of Fantasy
86:(AfD)? Read these primers!
66:02:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
750:
405:23:32, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
390:23:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
369:22:49, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
341:21:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
315:21:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
287:21:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
259:21:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
600:at the time of nomination
594:meet the requirements of
723:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
469:Encyclopedia Galactica
346:There's John Clute in
309:Tell me all about it.
281:Tell me all about it.
253:Tell me all about it.
84:Articles for deletion
604:this can be improved
239:List of elder races
474:endless discussion
378:ancient astronauts
676:
549:
317:
313:
312:
289:
285:
284:
257:
256:
101:Guide to deletion
91:How to contribute
741:
667:
590:. So it clearly
540:
427:
306:
305:
303:
278:
277:
275:
250:
249:
247:
228:
227:
213:
161:
143:
81:
34:
749:
748:
744:
743:
742:
740:
739:
738:
737:
731:deletion review
677:
550:
532:
429:
425:
299:
271:
243:
170:
134:
118:
115:
78:
75:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
747:
745:
736:
735:
717:
716:
698:
681:
666:
659:
658:
641:Oh, yeah, and
639:
638:
637:
619:
618:
577:
556:
555:
554:
539:
526:
510:
509:
493:- Topic fails
488:
433:
419:
409:
408:
407:
371:
319:
318:
290:
231:
230:
167:
114:
113:
108:
98:
93:
76:
74:
69:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
746:
734:
732:
728:
724:
719:
718:
715:
711:
707:
702:
699:
697:
693:
689:
685:
682:
680:
674:
670:
664:
661:
660:
657:
653:
649:
644:
640:
636:
632:
628:
623:
622:
621:
620:
617:
613:
609:
605:
601:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
578:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
557:
553:
547:
543:
537:
536:
535:
531:
530:
525:
524:
519:
515:
512:
511:
508:
504:
500:
496:
492:
489:
487:
483:
479:
475:
471:
470:
465:
461:
460:Fermi paradox
457:
453:
449:
445:
441:
437:
434:
432:
428:
422:
417:
413:
410:
406:
402:
398:
393:
392:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
372:
370:
366:
362:
358:
353:
349:
345:
344:
343:
342:
338:
334:
331:
329:
324:
316:
311:
310:
304:
302:
296:
291:
288:
283:
282:
276:
274:
268:
263:
262:
261:
260:
255:
254:
248:
246:
240:
236:
226:
222:
219:
216:
212:
208:
204:
201:
198:
195:
192:
189:
186:
183:
180:
176:
173:
172:Find sources:
168:
165:
159:
155:
151:
147:
142:
138:
133:
129:
125:
121:
117:
116:
112:
109:
106:
102:
99:
97:
94:
92:
89:
88:
87:
85:
80:
73:
70:
68:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
722:
720:
700:
683:
662:
642:
599:
591:
587:
583:
579:
558:
528:
522:
513:
490:
467:
463:
451:
435:
411:
373:
351:
327:
326:Changing to
325:
321:
320:
308:
301:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
300:
280:
273:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
272:
252:
245:ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants
244:
232:
220:
214:
206:
199:
193:
187:
181:
171:
77:
49:
47:
31:
28:
397:192.76.8.91
197:free images
450:applies, "
426:reply here
418:for us. --
416:WP:TOOSOON
235:WP:USERGEN
120:Elder race
72:Elder race
727:talk page
567:Rorshacma
444:WP:BEFORE
333:—valereee
37:talk page
729:or in a
706:Dimadick
648:Daranios
608:Daranios
357:valereee
164:View log
105:glossary
39:or in a
669:ZXCVBNM
559:Comment
542:ZXCVBNM
374:Comment
203:WP refs
191:scholar
137:protect
132:history
82:New to
596:WP:GNG
518:WP:TNT
514:Delete
495:WP:GNG
491:Delete
478:Andrew
448:WP:ATD
412:Delete
175:Google
141:delete
58:RL0919
54:WP:HEY
688:Julle
627:Julle
563:WP:OR
361:Julle
218:JSTOR
179:books
158:views
150:watch
146:links
16:<
710:talk
701:Keep
692:talk
684:Keep
673:TALK
663:Keep
652:talk
631:talk
612:talk
592:does
580:Keep
571:talk
546:TALK
523:Reyk
503:talk
482:talk
476:...
458:and
436:Keep
401:talk
386:talk
382:Artw
365:talk
337:talk
328:keep
211:FENS
185:news
154:logs
128:talk
124:edit
62:talk
50:keep
529:YO!
499:TTN
480:🐉(
359:. /
225:TWL
162:– (
712:)
694:)
654:)
633:)
614:)
573:)
505:)
484:)
464:is
403:)
388:)
367:)
339:)
297:.
269:.
205:)
156:|
152:|
148:|
144:|
139:|
135:|
130:|
126:|
64:)
52:.
708:(
690:(
675:)
671:(
650:(
629:(
625:/
610:(
569:(
548:)
544:(
501:(
423:|
399:(
384:(
363:(
335:(
330:.
229:)
221:·
215:·
207:·
200:·
194:·
188:·
182:·
177:(
169:(
166:)
160:)
122:(
107:)
103:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.