Talk:Battle of the Game Station

Rationale
See Talk:Skirmish at Tranquil Repose. This is flatly absurd. This kind of article needs to be rooted out of this wiki. Except in very rare cases articles should not be created for events or things that have no names. Battles in particular do not deserve their own names/pages unless the name is given in a primary source.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  07:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

For Deletion

 *  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  07:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC), per arguments at cited Talk Page.

Against Deletion

 * The evil dude - Thsi article is needed. It was a battle, it happened, and it was set in the Game Station. The Daleks didn't exactly go in there to hug all the humans and say sorry, did they?
 * Tangerineduel 07:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC) Agreed, this one is needed as there are multiple things occurring that can't really be wrapped up elsewhere.
 * I just don't see what this article accomplishes that the Game Station article doesn't (or can't) do. Indeed, this article is called one thing by the page name (Battle of the Game Station), and another thing by the lead sentence (Battle of Satellite Five).  At least the Game Station article explains the discrepancy.  Is there really that much difference between Satellite Five and this article?  I really don't see it.  Sure, right now, the history section of Game Station doesn't actually go into the details of the Dalek/Ninth Doctor confrontation, but there is absolutely no reason it couldn't.  In fact, to not have a detailed account there is somewhat weird, given that it's such a rich source of information about the Game Station.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  21:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * This article details the battle in all its various ins and outs whilst the Gamestation article (while it might benefit from some extra detail) would I would think seem a little bulging around the edges to include all the information of the battle of the Game Station. --Tangerineduel 14:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Decision
Prop delete has been removed, however a cleanup tag has been added as article requires some editing. Discussion on the name can continue without the prop delete tag. --Tangerineduel 15:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)