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. Sandstein 18:28, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jumpgate[edit]

[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)

Literally just a fancy term for "it's a wormhole". No secondary sources of note, and the entire thing is a WP:OR example farm. If deleted, it should probably be redirected to Jumpgate: The Reconstruction Initiative._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:54, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I couldn't find a single source that convinced me "jumpgates" should have a page of their own. I don't understand why this page exists when it serves the exact same function as Wormholes in fiction. Any content of high enough quality (i.e. not original research) could be salvaged and added to that other page and have "Jumpgate" redirect there. Although, as ZXCVBNM mentioned, redirecting it the MMORPG of the same name could also be an option. As a a third option, it could be turned into a disambiguation page that defined the term and links to both Wormholes in fiction and Jumpgate: The Reconstruction Initiative. PraiseVivec (talk) 17:14, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that a hatnote can be added to the Jumpgate game article that sends people to Wormholes in fiction._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 17:15, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Essentially redundant to Wormholes in fiction. The instances mentioned here should be included there, if appropriate. It has no sources that are unrelated to the works mentioned. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 02:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The term is used in some published literature in google books: [1], [2], [3]. Not sure if this brings it passed the threshold of notability. I'm on the fence.4meter4 (talk) 21:29, 25 September 2019 (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.