Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pon farr (2nd nomination)

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 Vulcan (Star Trek)#Mating drive. Less Unless (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pon farr

AfDs for this article:

[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)

The 2007 AFD (no consensus) already noted a lack of in-universe and real-world notability; even Sexuality in Star Trek only mentions this concept as a See also link. I would driveby-redirect this to Vulcan (Star Trek)#Mating drive where IMO this is already sufficiently covered, but I just know it would get reverted. – sgeureka ^t•c 23:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy. – sgeureka ^t•c 23:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 1, 2, 3, 4. Four reasonable academic sources, which all appear non-trivial from snippet/preview view, and plenty more on Google Scholar (if you add -"Pon Farr Press" to the search string) suggest that this is actually a notable topic. No real objection to a merge, but it's clear it has enough coverage for independent notability. Jclemens (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Vulcan (Star Trek) as per nomination. Lack of independent coverage and real-world notability. Satellizer el Bridget ^(Talk) 02:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Vulcan (Star Trek)#Mating drive, this seems like a WP:OVERLAP with the article about their fictional race even regardless of whether or not it's notable, but right now it's entirely WP:OR. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:27, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a WP:SS breakout, not an OVERLAP, as you can see by the "main" template in the article section, so the expectation would be to merge the material back appropriately. Jclemens (talk) 04:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. This may be notable, but what we have here is a 99% unreferenced WP:FANCRUFT/WP:OR. WP:TNT can be applied. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Vulcan (Star Trek)#Mating drive - This is a WP:NOPAGE situation, where even if the topic has coverage in reliable sources, it would be much better covered on the main topic on the fictional Vulcan race in general rather than split out. Merging would not be appropriate in this case because this current article has no material that would be suitable to merge - those sources found by Jclemens above can likely be used to bolster the section in the main Vulcan article, but as they are not currently included in this article, merging is not needed to do that. Rorshacma (talk) 17:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Vulcan (Star Trek). I think there is some interest in the topic, and each episode that mentions it links to it, but I don't think it's enough to be its own article. --Mgp28 (talk) 18:47, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or possibly Merge but I notice the article is badly sourced and looks like cruft. I don't think there is massive interest in the episode, it wasn't one of the best. I don't see enough for a standalone article. scope_creep^Talk 09:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect due to sourcing issues. Needs more independent coverage and would be a mention as part of a broader Star Trek topic. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:01, 20 March 2023 (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.