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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Targum (species) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This fictional alien species does not appear to be notable, as it is from a seemingly not notable short story published in a seemingly not notable magazine. I'm not finding any readily available sources. — TAnthony^Talk 23:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination: no evidence found of significant coverage by reliable sources. Seems to be spillover fan content from Aliens Wikia. --Animalparty! (talk) 01:51, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Could only find wiki-type sources for verification. Does not meet Wp:Note guidelines. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 03:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Even if the short story itself were to be found notable, the alien species within it would not be. Not unless it started showing up commonly elsewhere too. And it hasn't. And I don't think the short story is notable anyway. Delete. Fieari (talk) 03:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no assertion of notability independent of a magazine feature, for which the magazine feature is itself non-notable. —Mythdon 10:07, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete While I'm usually a fan of merging NN content, per what others have observed above, there is no valid and appropriate place on Wikipedia to reuse or capture any of this content. Jclemens (talk) 02:30, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Doesn't seem to meet GNG. No reliable sources out there, just wikis. Omni Flames (talk) 02:18, 22 September 2016 (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.