560:, I definitely can agree that this article needs some serious refocusing. So far, its emphasis is upon the plot elements, when it should have a great deal of focus upon the writing and design of the individual characters, one-by-one. Therefore, I believe we should essentially rewrite each and every character section to include the necessary elements for character lists. Should this page be deleted? Absolutely not; its subject matter is very notable, prominent and can be sourced, which, to Darkwarriorblake's credit, I should have taken care of when I started editing in the Prometheus section recently. But regardless, the subject matter remains out of the bounds of deletion, though emphasis should be drawn far beyond the plot. What do you guys think?
353:. Because I'm not aware of those articles and have not the time to nominate them, isn't an argument for "why bother getting rid of one". And as I said, there are already companion articles, for the alien and its varians, and significant characters like Ripley and Bishop. The rest of the character entries are regurgitating plot, there's no value you can add to them that isn't already present in the relevant film articles, so then you're just repeating information. Your additions to the article alone in just the last few weeks are huge amounts of just repeating plot, such as Shaw's section, so why would there be any indication that you will elevate this article beyond what it is right now?
370:; there have been numerous times in the past that we've constructively worked together and that I actually defended you against users who criticized and called for blocks on you. To answer your question, I first needed to incorporate the materials from the Prometheus article, which was a sizable undertaking. I was about to start referencing this article and clean up the redundancies when I saw you nominated it for deletion. As I stated earlier, this is a very prominent franchise with plenty of resources available out there, which you have not yet addressed in the defense of your AfD. If you read
538:. The fact that some issues haven't been taken care of is no reason for deletion; whoever proposed such harsh measure ought to help by taking care of those issues, instead of plotting against the article. For sure, it took the effort of several editors to build, and definitely has a certain degree of merit and usefulness, while there are hundreds of other articles out here in Knowledge (XXG) that have either lesser or almost none, thus, I disagree about it being 'redundant'. --
374:, there really isn't any applicable reason for this article to be deleted. Your basis is that there aren't reliable resources out there? Simply because I haven't conducted a cleanup of the article does not mean that, as the priority is to prevent it from being needlessly deleted. You can do a simple Google search for most any element in the article and you'll see results.
208:
Article is redundant. It has been in existence for 10 years, has 2 references after being tagged for 8 years and suffering from in-universe problems tagged 6 years ago. It offers no information that is not or could not be covered in the relevant articles. If necessary the cast list table can be
274:
I only recently came across this article and have thus far worked to include missing content. This article has significant notability and context, as it serves as a character list for a prominent franchise. It definitely deserves to stay, but I agree that it requires significant cleanup and
616:
like a separate entity... Ugh. I came across this page like, oh, I don't know, a month or so ago? It's a hefty task, but I think it's a page with necessary subject matter, so it deserves better than the shitty state it's in. Six years? Too long, indeed. Let's make this article chime.
275:
referencing, which I will be taking up. So, I say we should dismiss this AfD and I'll look to improve the quality of the article and add the references, which most certainly can be found like the boat load, so it's not just pure in-universe jargon, as
Darkwarriorblake's implying.
603:
franchise two years ago and started editing related articles last fall. I've been systematically approaching the articles and retrofitting them to be more in-line with the franchise, as they have generally been a discombobulating mess, mixing together with
177:
401:
My issue is not lack of sources, it's that I don't see what this article does or can do, that the main character and film articles do not already do. And there was no tone implied, so i apologise.
317:
warrant companion articles, such as one detailing characters. Either you can agree with this perspective, or you could apply your reasoning across the wiki and nominate for deletion
171:
249:
130:
300:
Anyone of note from this series has their own article, like Ripley and the Alien. Everyone else is relevant to their own film article, existing is not an excuse for a list.
225:
103:
98:
137:
107:
586:
If you are willing to get this done (remember, this page has been tagged for 6 years in some cases), then I am happy to withdraw the deletion request.
90:
599:
I'd definitely be willing to take this up as my main focus for
Knowledge (XXG) until it's up to par. You know, I only watched the movies in the
313:
Existing isn't an excuse, but the fact remains that we're dealing with one of the most prominent science fiction franchises of all time, which
414:
Hey, it's all good about you and I, man. I added a courtesy break beneath for a new angle I have. Let me know what you think, please! ;)
192:
159:
17:
322:
633:
576:
430:
390:
341:
318:
291:
59:
209:
merged into the central Alien series article, but the rest of the article is in-universe plot and all of it is unsourced.
153:
94:
637:
594:
580:
547:
520:
507:
489:
476:
434:
409:
394:
361:
345:
308:
295:
265:
241:
217:
72:
658:
371:
40:
557:
498:". If you don't wish to be part of it, then relax and let others do it --which they've done-- and don't interfere. --
149:
591:
517:
486:
406:
358:
305:
214:
199:
86:
78:
350:
512:
Please re-consider your tone. It's disgusting and immature. And they haven't "done" it, that's the point.
467:
259:
235:
654:
587:
513:
482:
402:
367:
354:
301:
210:
36:
165:
629:
572:
426:
386:
337:
287:
254:
230:
325:. With the state of things, there simply is not just enough cause to delete this specific article.
185:
68:
535:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
653:
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
534:
This article serves as a guide to those fictional species depicted in this very significant
618:
561:
458:
415:
375:
326:
276:
53:
64:
543:
503:
124:
539:
499:
466:
characters and we have to put those all characters somewhere together. --
647:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
556:- After examining this list and examining the character list on
481:
Why do we have to put all these characters somewhere together?
456:
Per DarthBotto and the list just needs some improvements.
120:
116:
112:
184:
198:
56:has shown willingness to take up with the article.
462:is filming now, which will also feature some new
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
661:). No further edits should be made to this page.
250:list of Television-related deletion discussions
8:
248:Note: This debate has been included in the
224:Note: This debate has been included in the
247:
226:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
223:
366:I'm disappointed in your hostile tone,
52:. Nomination withdrawn as we know that
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
319:List of Jurassic Park characters
372:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion policy
558:Knowledge (XXG):Featured lists
321:, as well as every article in
1:
494:Please re-consider the word "
678:
638:03:51, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
595:21:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
581:21:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
548:00:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
521:17:38, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
508:00:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
490:21:23, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
477:02:39, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
435:21:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
410:21:39, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
395:21:31, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
362:17:38, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
346:21:49, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
309:21:23, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
296:23:23, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
266:09:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
242:09:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
218:08:48, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
73:04:11, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
650:Please do not modify it.
87:List of Alien characters
79:List of Alien characters
32:Please do not modify it.
592:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
518:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
487:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
407:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
359:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
306:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
215:SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE!
626:
622:
569:
565:
471:Captain Assassin!
459:Alien: Covenant
423:
419:
383:
379:
334:
330:
284:
280:
268:
244:
63:
60:non-admin closure
669:
652:
624:
620:
612:, then treating
588:Darkwarriorblake
567:
563:
514:Darkwarriorblake
483:Darkwarriorblake
474:
421:
417:
403:Darkwarriorblake
381:
377:
368:Darkwarriorblake
355:Darkwarriorblake
332:
328:
302:Darkwarriorblake
282:
278:
264:
262:
257:
240:
238:
233:
211:Darkwarriorblake
203:
202:
188:
140:
128:
110:
57:
34:
677:
676:
672:
671:
670:
668:
667:
666:
665:
659:deletion review
648:
636:
579:
468:
433:
393:
344:
294:
260:
255:
253:
236:
231:
229:
145:
136:
101:
85:
82:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
675:
673:
664:
663:
643:
642:
641:
640:
628:
571:
554:Courtesy break
551:
550:
529:
528:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
439:
438:
437:
425:
385:
336:
286:
269:
245:
206:
205:
142:
81:
76:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
674:
662:
660:
656:
651:
645:
644:
639:
635:
631:
627:
615:
611:
607:
602:
598:
597:
596:
593:
589:
585:
584:
583:
582:
578:
574:
570:
559:
555:
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
530:
522:
519:
515:
511:
510:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
492:
491:
488:
484:
480:
479:
478:
475:
473:
472:
465:
461:
460:
455:
452:
436:
432:
428:
424:
413:
412:
411:
408:
404:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
392:
388:
384:
373:
369:
365:
364:
363:
360:
356:
352:
351:WP:OTHERSTUFF
349:
348:
347:
343:
339:
335:
324:
323:this category
320:
316:
312:
311:
310:
307:
303:
299:
298:
297:
293:
289:
285:
273:
270:
267:
263:
258:
251:
246:
243:
239:
234:
227:
222:
221:
220:
219:
216:
212:
201:
197:
194:
191:
187:
183:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
151:
148:
147:Find sources:
143:
139:
135:
132:
126:
122:
118:
114:
109:
105:
100:
96:
92:
88:
84:
83:
80:
77:
75:
74:
70:
66:
61:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
649:
646:
613:
609:
605:
600:
553:
552:
532:Strong keep:
531:
495:
470:
469:
463:
457:
454:Strong keep:
453:
314:
272:Strong keep:
271:
207:
195:
189:
181:
174:
168:
162:
156:
146:
133:
49:
47:
31:
28:
172:free images
614:Prometheus
54:DarthBotto
655:talk page
536:franchise
65:Mhhossein
37:talk page
657:or in a
606:Predator
131:View log
39:or in a
178:WP refs
166:scholar
104:protect
99:history
150:Google
108:delete
601:Alien
464:Alien
261:Talk
237:Talk
193:JSTOR
154:books
138:Stats
125:views
117:watch
113:links
16:<
634:cont
630:talk
625:OTTO
621:ARTH
608:and
577:cont
573:talk
568:OTTO
564:ARTH
544:talk
504:talk
431:cont
427:talk
422:OTTO
418:ARTH
391:cont
387:talk
382:OTTO
378:ARTH
342:cont
338:talk
333:OTTO
329:ARTH
315:does
292:cont
288:talk
283:OTTO
279:ARTH
256:Musa
232:Musa
186:FENS
160:news
121:logs
95:talk
91:edit
69:talk
50:keep
610:AvP
540:AVM
500:AVM
200:TWL
129:– (
590:/
546:)
516:/
506:)
496:we
485:/
405:/
357:/
304:/
252:.
228:.
213:/
180:)
123:|
119:|
115:|
111:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
71:)
632:•
623:B
619:D
575:•
566:B
562:D
542:(
502:(
429:•
420:B
416:D
389:•
380:B
376:D
340:•
331:B
327:D
290:•
281:B
277:D
204:)
196:·
190:·
182:·
175:·
169:·
163:·
157:·
152:(
144:(
141:)
134:·
127:)
89:(
67:(
62:)
58:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.