Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Imperial Empire

The Imperial Empire

The Imperial Empire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:GNG, entirely sourced to fan wikis. ~ A412 ^talk! 13:33, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. ~ A412 ^talk! 13:33, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. A search of my own yielded nothing close to sniffing WP:GNG.

Yojo98 (talk) 13:45, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

WP:GNG is irrelevant because explain to me how under any circumstance whatsoever would it pass WP:GNG, like what fantasy land THC doodoo kaka are you on to think that:

1. Fan Groups (especially groups this large and influential) don't deserve Wikipedia pages

2. Fan Group pages will not be sourced entirely from, well, information provided by the group in question,

And third, Unless you actually include the results of your search, there is no basis to prove that your results are accurate. ~2026-40909-12 (talk) 02:41, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

"WP:GNG is irrelevant because explain to me how under any circumstance whatsoever would it pass WP:GNG" I mean, you've explained perfectly why it should be deleted. There's no reason to reply to answer any of your other questions. GNG is in-fact very relevant, and if it fails GNG, it's not notable enough for an article under our standards. λ NegativeMP1 05:10, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Delete per norm clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG Dragon22121 (talk) 14:12, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

• Delete as an obvious GNG and NORG failure. No reliable sources seem to discuss the group in significant detail. Nothing in the article right now helps at all as it is all from unreliable, user-generated wikis. λ NegativeMP1 03:32, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

  I want to engage with this in good faith rather than dispute the core problem: I did a fairly thorough search for independent coverage of the Imperials/Imperial Empire (gaming press, 2b2t-adjacent journalism, general web search) and came up empty. none of it independent per WP:RS / WP:USERG. So I'm not going to argue this passes GNG as written, because I don't think it does.

  What I'd ask editors to weigh instead is WP:ATD rather than outright deletion:

  • Redirect to 2b2t, with at most a brief, neutrally-worded mention of Imperials as one of several long-running player factions on that server, if and when a source independent of the group turns up to support even a sentence. This is consistent with how other 2b2t-era factions (Facepunchers, 4channers) are handled as part of the server's history rather than standalone articles.
  • Draftify in the interim per WP:ATD-I, given the group is still active as of 2026. This keeps the option open without an article sitting in mainspace on sourcing it can't currently support.

  Either path preserves the content history under WP:PRESERVE without the article claiming a level of notability the sourcing doesn't back up. I don't think that's an unreasonable ask given the group's actual longevity, even though I agree GNG isn't met today. TryFast (talk) 10:42, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

  "So I'm not going to argue this passes GNG as written, because I don't think it does." That's where the discussion ends. GNG is the bare minimum for all articles on this site. This article is entirely WP:FANCRUFT, with no sources at all providing significant coverage. As this isn't notable, it doesn't need a redirect. The same is true for a draft. If there is no chance of something being notable, it doesn't need a draft. Delete. 11WB 💬 10:33, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

  As a follow up, your user page states you are a member of this group. So this is also a WP:COI violation. It is recommended not to create or edit articles about things you are involved in or have a strong connection with. 11WB 💬 10:40, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

• Delete as an article about enthusiast information entirely sourced from user-generated wikis fails to meet WP:GNG. This information is already well-sourced on the group's own wiki, the 2b2t wiki, and could assist there. Adding a neutral sentence about the group based on a primary source is fine but sort of parallel to the overarching exercise of what to do with all the information here. I disagree with the proposed alternatives:

The drafter is welcome to incubate in draft or userspace article, but the prospects for notability being met in future are poor when their search has not yielded any secondary coverage that would contribute to notability. WP:PRESERVE must be interpreted in the context of "preserve appropriate content".

Redirection should be dealt with caution because (a) the prose suggests The Imperial Empire seems to be only a secondary title for the group; which was titled that way because (b) both primary title The Imperials and The Imperial Empire imitate a range of other fictional and real-world topics. The concept and iconography of the group seems to be based on the Empire of the Elder Scrolls series, for one. VRXCES (talk) 05:35, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

• Delete WP:GNG failure. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:37, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

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.