Deletion of Chronology of Star Wars (2nd nomination)

Comment: per . That is all
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: due to improvements since previous AfD and as it is inexcessive coverage of a notable topic backed by numerous reliable sources.   is not a valid reason for deletion.  Sincerely
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: per great nomination. Excessive |plot, |non-notable, |potential copyright violation - this article is a mess. No amount of editing will fix the first two policies I mentioned; I smell  on this discussion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PLOT||WP:NOTE||WP:COPYVIO||WP:ILIKEIT)

Comment: The nomination just tells us that the article has problems but 99% of our articles are less than perfect and it is our |editing policy to improve them not delete them.  I find no difficulty in adding an academic source which discusses the way in which the creators amend and maintain the official canon.  Given the cultural importance of this work, we should clearly cover the topic well and deletion will not assist in this.  The matter is |notable and  so should be |preserved
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT||WP:NOTABLE||WP:PRESERVE)