Talk:Powered exoskeletons in fiction

CAS?

Is there any well-known source which uses this acronym? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.66.137.184 (talk) 23:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Master Chief in Halo 3.png

The image Image:Master Chief in Halo 3.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:WinstonIronman.jpg
• Image:Uchu no Senshi.gif

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge discussion

See Talk:Mecha#Merge discussion, where a merge of this article with Mecha is proposed. Fences&Windows 00:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Content merged to Powered exoskeleton

I have merged some of the content to Powered exoskeleton, and made the remainder a redirect to that article, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powered exoskeletons in fiction. Mike Christie (talk – library) 12:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Restore the page?

Why exactly was this page redirected to powered exoskeleton when the fact is that said page doesn't even have a list of uses in fiction? Did it have it at the time? Well, not now, so I think this page should be restored. --Luka1184 (talk) 11:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

EDIT: If you actually look at what option won or lost in whether it should be deleted or kept, it was keep that won... Well, sort of. Keep got 3 votes, then delete got 3, and then a merge was also there, which means the page it was redirected to either need to have the same info added to it (unless it was decided to not have this later in a new vote??) or you need to do another vote instead, because no side actually won 100%. It was 50/50. --Luka1184 (talk) 11:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles need to be based on secondary sources. Reviewing the version of powered exoskeletons in fiction here that existed during the AFD process, it is overwhelmingly based on primary sources. The point of using secondary sources is to indicate notability outside the primary sources and our own observations. For example, we could technically find examples of typical objects like pencils across multiple works and compile them, but that by itself does not give an indication that it is of encyclopedic value. Compare that version to list of films featuring powered exoskeletons, where the listings are based on secondary sources observing the use of powered exoskeletons in films. It may be possible for there to be a standalone article about powered exoskeletons in fiction in general, but per WP:PAGEDECIDE, it is not clear if a separate page is warranted when a section at powered exoskeleton would do. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 14:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)