Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digivolution

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 Keep. Deathphoenix 04:24, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Digivolution

Granted, this has been expanded beyond a mere dictdef, but what makes this term notable and encyclopedic? "Digivolution" garners 728 google hits. [1] Is this what Jimbo had in mind when he sought out to create the "sum of all human knowledge"? [2] GRider\^talk 19:24, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Surely Jimbo Wales would CSD'ed if he saw it! Just kidding. This is not a worthy topic for an encyclopaedia. --Neigel von Teighen 20:18, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, yes it was what Jimbo had in mind. Kappa 22:22, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I expected to vote for deletion when I took a look at the article, but in honesty it's actually an example of what I think a breakout from a main article that's gotten too large should look like. This could use cleanup, sure, but it focuses on a high-level topic, of non-trivial complexity, which is present in varying forms through all incarnations of the series, and it discusses the incarnation of the topic across all the various Digimon series, and it's hard to think of a more important central concept to the series. I have to vote Keep and cleanup. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:32, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, just under the bar of notability, digimon fancruft. Megan1967 01:17, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. An article cataloging all the wonderous ways by which Digimon transform to their wonderous higher forms is not encyclopedic. For one thing, Digimon characters are fiction; and encyclopedias are not fiction. Lets try to keep Wikipedia from to digivolving into the Encyclopedia of Digimon. --BM 15:52, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - the term is only one used in the dub (the original uses plain old shinka), although it's a central plot device to the series and universe. kelvSYC 18:20, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This is at least marginally useful; the fact that a different term is used in the Japanese version is not all that significant, as we would want to use the English term anyway. (But if we didn't, we could always move it.) -Aranel ("Sarah") 22:14, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Part of the full encyclopedic description of the series which is too large for the main article. Google search clearly gets almost 5000 hits, not 728. Encyclopedias do summarize fiction; there are thousands of unchallenged articles about fictional items. Gururvishnu 21:22, 26 Feb 2005
• Keep. It seems marginally useful, as it explains one of the less-mentioned but important points in the Digimon series. --Andylkl 08:45, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, agree with others. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 03:17, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Digimon: Digital Monsters, which isn't so long that this needs to be broken out. — Gwalla | Talk 04:05, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect as per Gwalla. —RaD Man (talk) 04:34, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Digimon article is too large. And I see no problem with it. Explains major concept in the show. Suggest that it remain in the encyclopedia. Unsigned vote by 143.200.225.151 (talk • contribs)
• Keep - Interesting article that provides insight on the show. Unsigned vote by 143.200.145.27 (talk • contribs), who has two edits.
• Keep - I worked long and hard with my experience to try and keep the facts acurate and besides with a good look as well as the right cleanup then it deserves to stay. Unsigned vote by 24.20.153.45 (talk • contribs)

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.