Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Professor Birch (recount)

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept - SimonP 15:27, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Professor Birch

Is this or is this not the ultimate proof that there is an irrefutably heavy bias towards inclusion of Pokémon-related articles? Please discuss. --GRider\^talk 18:07, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Pokécruft. Android79 18:50, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
• This appears to be a direct extension of Wikipedia:Deletion policy/Nintendo items. The discussion is still active but appears to be favoring a merge unless the item can show notability outside the game. --Allen3 19:07, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. That is incorrect; Professor Birch is not a Nintendo item, the discussion is unrelated. --GRider\^talk 19:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, merge if you must. Why have you listed this again anyway? Xezbeth 19:21, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Well-known character in a very popular cartoon & game series. 3,180 Google Hits as "Prof. Birch" and a further 597 as "Professor Birch". Come on, now... the previous VfD ended less than 2 weeks ago and was only tallied yesterday! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:53, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • It was tallied with, quote: 9 clear "delete" votes, 3 clear "keep" votes and 3 clear "merge" votes. Odd, isn't it? --GRider\^talk 20:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • So the reason that this article was re-nominated a scant 11 hours after its previous deletion discussion was closed was that 9 is not a multiple of two. Uncle G 10:43, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
      • My trust is that you understand why this was renominated. --GRider\^talk 21:42, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. Grue 20:23, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Merge, and as for Average Earthman's retort below, we can create a disambiguation when and if another Professor Birch gets an article. Meelar (talk) 21:21, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Hmm I should just vote clear Keep to make it easier for vote talliers. While there is clear bias towards pokemons vs other -mons and suchlike, this article isn't a particularly good demonstration of that. Kappa 21:50, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, as per starblind. Also keep out respect for the result of the last vfd. DaveTheRed 21:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • It could be argued that the solution most likely to garner acceptance would be a merger with a larger topic...I'm not sure if a flat "keep" is respecting the last VfD when there were only 3 keep opinions and more than half the voters wanted the article deleted outright. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 21:59, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • WP:GVFD#Votes. There were 6 keep opinions, and 9/15 is less than 2/3. Uncle G 10:43, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
    • Or one could also argue that since the end result of the last vfd was to keep, we should honor that instead. But really, I would accept a merge too. DaveTheRed 07:04, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or merge. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 21:59, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • WP:GVFD#Incompatible_votes. Choose one. Or at least let the closer known which circumstances would result in which choice. Uncle G 10:43, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
    • I didn't say delete and merge, I said or—performing one but not both of those actions is GFDL compatible; perhaps I should have said xor. Either would be acceptable to me. A merger and redirect would be fine, but I don't want my opinion taken to mean that this article should be kept outright--which seems to be the way that these things are counted. If we had an appropriate shorthand notation for that vote, I would use it. (I'm sure there are a lot of 'mergist' Wikipedians who are also frustrated by this.) --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 19:56, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, pokecruft. Megan1967 05:38, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn fancruft. ComCat 07:30, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• There were 9 deletes and three merges to 3 keeps, so it got kept? I don't get it. My personal opinion is to Delete still, but I'd suggest merge would be the reasonable compromise from the previous vote. Average Earthman 10:20, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • WP:GVFD#Votes. There were 6 keep opinions and 9 delete opinions, and 9/15 is less than 2/3. Uncle G 10:43, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
    • I count three keeps, and three merges. Are you saying a merge vote is a keep vote? Average Earthman 09:13, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • WP:GVFD#Voting_shorthands Uncle G 10:54, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
        • No, merge doesn't say 'keep this article', it says move the info and create a redirect. So 12 votes say this isn't good enough for its own article, and 3 say it is. That is a pretty strong vote not to be left as its own article, and the compromise in this situation would clearly be a merge, unless there is clearly no appropriate article to merge to. Average Earthman 10:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
          • Wrong. Merge does say keep the article. Read WP:DA and think about the actual mechanics of a merger process. Also read WP:GVFD#Closure and Wikipedia:Deletion process. If you've been voting "Merge" up until now thinking that it meant deletion then (a) you've been making the WP:GVFD#Incompatible_votes mistake, and (b) you've not performed enough article mergers. ☺ Uncle G 12:34, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)
            • What do you mean, I'm wrong? "Merge to Example" is a shorthand for "Keep and merge the content into Example, leaving a redirect afterwards" - that from the link you just supplied. And to me, that is what I just said. If you think that a merge vote does not mean move the content into another article and create a redirect, then I suggest you should read the links you supplied. Average Earthman 13:11, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as below. The page should have been deleted or merged before. Martg76 17:40, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect. -Sean Curtin 06:17, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
• So if an article gets 10 delete votes, 10 merge votes, and 1 keep vote, it's kept because there was no consensus to delete? That makes no sense. A merge vote should not be treated exactly the same as a keep vote because they are not the same vote. Delete this, or failing that, merge, which is probably what should have been done initially, as a compromise between keep and delete. -R. fiend 16:29, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Or, to look at it differently, there were 3 votes to keep this as a separate article, while there were 12 votes saying that this should not be its own article. 3 to 12? Don't tell me the bias towards keep is that great. -R. fiend 17:03, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Also, I'd like to point out that one of the three keep votes was a commentless vote from The Recycling Troll, who has since been banned indefinitely by Jimbo for trolling. In light of that I'm not sure his vote should be given full weight. -R. fiend 22:54, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I'm not changing my vote, as I believe Professor Birch is a sufficiently important character in the Pokémon series. However, this article is within the jurisdiction of the (poorly-organized) Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokénav, so any executive decision must eventually go through their membership. kelvSYC 22:59, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Are you implying that those participating in this VfD discussion (or, more specifically, the administrator that makes the final decision) do not have such jurisdiction? Android79 23:07, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, Pokecruft. Edeans 04:21, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, as per clear consensus on previous vote. Merge means get rid of the existing article. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:10, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep or merge - David Gerard 22:58, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Important character, important topic (unfortunately). I read Pokemon articles when i'm bored. Keep. Hedley 03:22, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Original discussion below:

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.