Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World War II.5

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 delete. Cirt (talk) 06:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

World War II.5 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete ) – (View log)

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

This article falls under the category of "things I made up one day that sound legit". It is particularly tragic because, as far as things go that are made up one day that sound legit, I'd have totally believed this article were it not for the cheesy title (which shows no relevant hits on Google) and the inaccurate lists (Indiana Jones didn't take place during World War II but rather throughout the 1930s, and The Sum of All Fears is a quintessentially Cold War book). Good effort though. Alas, the jig is up and it's time to send this article to a digital graveyard. Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete Definitely WP:MADEUP. Jujutacular ^talk _contribs 19:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete and could have been speedy deleted. I suppose there's a sort of air of possible legitimacy about it which refrains people from the speedy delete.Cream147 _{Shout at me for doing wrong} 22:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete: Made Up. Joe Chill (talk) 22:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]
• Don't Care: I wasted enough time on this. Let some else save it because later on someone else in the future will rewrite the same article if you delete it.Septagram (talk) 00:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

(By The Way)

• • WWII+: [1]
  • WWII+: [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Septagram (talk • contribs) 05:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

The first source is a course catalog from the University of North Dakota, and makes no mention of "WWII+" or any variant thereof. The second link is a forum with 1 mention of "WW2+". This is not enough to show that this term is anything more than WP:MADEUP. I see no indication of widespread use in the industry. Jujutacular ^talk _contribs 04:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

• • Tarantino's World War II Redux http://calitreview.com/4560
  • WW2 Redux and world war II redux has a better search result on Google. Would ww2 redux be a better title than ww2.5?Septagram (talk) 04:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete per WP:MADEUP. Gosox5555 (talk) 13:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]
• Delete or redirect to Alternate history. Hairhorn (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

Alternate history is tempting but it covers all periods of history (including WW2) while there is a whole genre of WW2 alternative history that is more prolific than steampunk and is not covered in much detail by any single article. If a section dedicated to WW2 was added (would be large), it might work in Alternate history. Septagram (talk) 05:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

Alternate WW2 histories are discussed at Alternate History. I'm not convinced this needs its own entry. Hairhorn (talk) 11:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC) [reply ]

• Delete per nom, with all possible speed.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 03:32, 12 September 2009 (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.