Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-canon

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 of the debate was Redirect to canon (fiction) Computerjoe 's talk 15:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

non-canon[edit]

Pardon the lengthy nom If you just take a cursory look at the page, it may seem full enough to warrant it's own article. The fact is though, that "Non-canon" is merely a word that has no inherent encyclopedic value. This article is a dicdef--when I found it, the article claimed that "non-canon" is a term used only for anime, but I knew this wasn't true so I attempted to add some information about Biblical non-canon texts, and, reluctantly, Star Wars. But then I realized that I am merely adding examples to a dicdef. The section about anime and manga is merely an explanation about how some stories or comics are "non-canon". It's as if I edited the article for green and added a section about how grass and dollar bills are green. This makes no sense, becasue that information belongs in their respective articles (Grass and dollar). Correspondingly, the anime information belongs in the Anime article. (Or perhaps Dragonball Z.) Articles about words (as opposed to Proper nouns) should explain the definition, nature, and intricacies of the word, and not its existence or occurence in outside phenomena. AdamBiswanger1 01:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-keep Dict def of a negative? Doubleunplusgood. Kotepho 01:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-keep per Kotepho. (It also doesn't specify whether it's the antonym of canon (fiction), Canon Law, Canon law, Biblical canon, etc.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Or, for that matter, the musical form. Zetawoof^(ζ) 03:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this related to the medical condition of Pachelbelism, the tendency to excessive canonicalisation? Just zis Guy you know? 15:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Difficult to see how this could be anything but a dictionary definition, and not an encyclpedia subject. Tyrenius 02:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, dicdef--TBCTaLk?!? 02:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-keep, dicdef. --Coredesat talk 02:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Canon (fiction). ~ trialsanderrors 03:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-non-keep negatives aren't not bad. SM247 05:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete So the closing admin doesn't get too confused. MichaelBillington 07:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Canon (fiction), or possibly redirect Canon (fiction) to Non-fanon. --Nscheffey^(T/C) 10:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Canoncruft. --DaveG12345 11:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect per trialsanderrors. Smerdis of Tlön 13:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Canon (fiction) Shimmin 13:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary, if it's not already there. But get it outta here! WilyD 14:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to canon (fiction). The word is widely used in SFF fandom, not just anime. 23skidoo 15:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CommentRespectfully, it's widely-used in alot of areas, so it should be redirected to the Canon disambig page. Let whoever is looking decide for themselves AdamBiswanger1 15:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dab page then? It seems a common enough search term. ~ trialsanderrors 15:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it's basically just a dicdef and will never be anything more. Transwiki if the term is in actual use, but is it? I've heard "non-canonical" used but never "non-canon". KleenupKrew 20:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to canon. This is the disambiguation page, and non-canon is at least as likely to be a search term for the religious phenomenon as for the fiction/entertainment phenomenon. GRBerry 00:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Canon (fiction) will do for me, since there is only one concept being discussed here. Just zis Guy you know? 11:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Biblical canon is also discussed. It should redirect to the disambig AdamBiswanger1 13:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Canon (fiction). Penelope D 03:39, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Redirect to Canon (fiction) per KleenupKrew I've never heard it in a religious context. Eluchil404 17:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Canon (fiction) Percy Snoodle 15:23, 3 July 2006 (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.