Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solo family

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 redirect to Skywalker family#Han Solo. Consensus is against keeping. Whether and what to merge is up to editors. Sandstein 14:21, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Solo family (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) requirement (not a single source linked discusses the concept of this family in depth, it is mentioned in passing few times and other than that this is a fancrufty plot summary and WP:SYNTH of information about his sister and other relatives). WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar (but I did find three sources - but they are of dubious reliability and don't go beyond a plot summary, but maybe they'll be of some use to someone in the future): [1] (plot summary), [2] (just plot summary trivia about various family members, the family itself is not discussed in a dedicated section), and [3], which again is not about the family as about various relations of its members. I actually think the meme article would be a good addition to the article about Han Solo himself, b/c really it's all about him. But his family doesn't seem to meet our requirement for stand-alone notability. Let's discuss. Ps. There was an old AfD about it in 2004 and even then it was split half and half between keep and delete - and remember, in these early days everyone and their dog tended to be inclusionist :P PPS. Another solution could be to just prune it down to a disambig without a need for a hard delete, perhaps. And before someone tells me AfD is not for discussion of creating a disambig, remember - technically this had an AfD 16 years ago so it needs another one as otherwise one could be in turn accused of disregarding past consensus (which some apparently did judge 'keep' back then, sigh). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I have not yet done a WP:BEFORE to see if there are any further sources not cited in the article, but I have reason to believe that there are plenty to be found given the significant amount of coverage generated by the Star Wars IP in the past 6 years. My response as follows:
  • If I was on Wikipedia and had participated in the 2004 AfD, I would have supported deletion. If the article had seen little to no improvements 16 years on like certain obscure articles which have been gradually rediscovered years later, I'd say the nominator's AfD rationale is fully justified. However, that is clearly not the case here: the article in its present state is extensively sourced, and all of the cited secondary sources only came into existence post-2004. An editor mentioned that they did an extensive rewrite of the article back in 2012 to cleanup its issues and it clearly shows, although there is certainly room for improvement. The state of the sourcing clearly makes a WP:CCOS for the topic and does not give the impression that the issues with the article is insurmountable and requires a hard WP:TNT, rather the opposite and the various measures proposed by WP:ATD should be considered. I would say that it also meets WP:GNG since the themes surrounding the Solo family form a significant plot element of the Star Wars EU novels pre-2012 as well as the new sequel trilogy, but a caveat is that the Skywalker family article actually duplicates much of the scope of its contents because of the marriage between Han Solo and Leia Skywalker.
  • There is a tag for a merge proposal with the Skywalker family article since August 2020 (which have not yet been removed), but no discussion had actually been initiated by the proposer and it's been just left as is, outside of a few comments by other editors who were understandably confused by the lack of an actual proposal by the mergist proposer. I am not sure why the nominator did not proactively pursue that option and restart the discussion, instead of attempting to force a cleanup through AfD (and AfD is WP:Notcleanup) since there are clear solutions recommended by WP:ATD.
  • I personally feel that a deletion rationale which argues that a topic concerning the Solo family is really a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of the Skywalker family article makes more sense and might get support then trying to construe the topic as non-notable, which is eminently not true. However, this article on the face of it also seems to meet the requirements of WP:LISTN as Han and Leia have two distinct sets of children between the Legends and the canon universes, and so some prose which puts both versions of the Solo family into context in such a list article makes more sense then in the Skywalker family article. One idea to improve/cleanup the article is to rename/move the article into something like a "List of Han Solo family members" if editors feel strongly about the idea of consistency in the article's title and that it should be renamed, but this should be dealt with in the relevant article's talk page, not AfD.
  • Lastly, I would appreciate if the nominator would cease misrepresenting the Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) essay as a "requirement" in every fiction-related AfD they commence. There is no SNG for fictional elements on Wikipedia. It's really misleading to less experienced editors who may not fully comprehend Wikipedia's complex hierarchy of bureaucratic rules and especially its complex notability policies, and it really doesn't lend any credibility to the nominator's arguments with many experienced editors. Haleth (talk) 06:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Haleth, I will reformulate the 'requirement' term in my future noms. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete I see no reason to have an overall family article. Anything worth covering can be covered on the articles on the individual people. This article is basically way too focused on in universe issues and not enough on real world issues.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a few of the individual characters have proven notability with reliable sources. But this is an original synthesis of those separate notable articles into a new topic that itself isn't notable. It's a WP:CONTENTFORK and doesn't cover anything unique that isn't already covered at the individual articles. A redirect to Han Solo as the main notable character would be fine. Jontesta (talk) 16:54, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/redirect to Skywalker family, where the Solos are already covered. No need fo duplication, but merging/redirecting is preferable as an alternative, since it is a plausible search term.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per Jontesta. As they mentioned, while a couple of the individual characters in this fictional family are certainly notable, there are no real sources about the family tree as a whole, and combining information for those several notable topics into a single article is WP:SYNTH. Even the few reliable, non-primary sources being used currently in the article are on specific, notable individuals, not on the family as a whole. Rorshacma (talk) 16:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: WP:SYNTH and fancruft. — Kawnhr (talk) 19:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Skywalker family. I find this suggestion compelling, as there that page is notable, and adding the Solo family information in the article makes sense to me. Timmccloud (talk) 23:26, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/redirect with/to Skywalker family as a plausible alternate search term. These families are - for the purposes of plot - inextricably linked, and the Skywalkers are the more notable (sorry Han!). An awful lot of this article is 'fancruft' written about in-universe topics, of which there is plenty of coverage at our hairy cousin. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 10:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect as primary sourced without enough sources to meet the WP:GNG. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:41, 10 February 2021 (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.