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 redirect to List of Star Wars characters#E. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:07, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emperor's Royal Guard (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)

Unnotable fictional entity; all sources present and that I can find are in-universe plot summaries or merchandise (action figure/etc.) description. I would suggest a merge but I cannot think of a valid target, plus there is really nothing to say - Palpatine article may mention he has special guards, but I don't see a reason we should describe them in more detail anywhere (of course, no prejudice to anyone who figures out where to merge this and does so). But as a stand-alone article, I don't think it is encyclopedic. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:39, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore redirect to List of Star Wars characters#E created in 2013 and stable for two years until content restoration. The restoring editor did not "have the time for burden of proof" then -- and, while correct in also pointing out there "is no Dana, only Zuul rush," probably the absence of significant work on the article since then supports the notion of a redirect. --EEMIV (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect: Since I am on my iPad more so than a computer, it gets a little tough to edit even if I do have proof when it comes to finding sources. That's what happened then. I am struggling just typing already. I came across list articles at the time ranking them but I am not sure I could still find them though. That was a while back! Also when I did get more active it was in proving notability in different articles like here, here and here. Meanwhile I am still more speculative that the first aliens depicted don't have their own articles than these cameoed characters that were much cooler in Legends. Anyways nice savage Ghostbusters reference, Eemiv. lol Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 21:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

• Redirect to Star Wars - not notable enough to warrant its own page. Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of Star Wars characters#E: Even though they are one of my favorite minor parts of the franchise, I have to agree with the above comments that they do not appear to meet the notability standards as Wikipedia sets it forth. Aoba47 (talk) 16:39, 22 May 2017 (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.