Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PMX-000 Messala

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 delete. —Centrx→talk • 01:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PMX-000 Messala

PMX-000 Messala (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Fails WP:V and WP:RS, unsourced, no reliable sources either to confirm the article's content or to support notability. Written from a completely non-real-world perspective, so fails WP:FICT. Reads like fancruft and original research. Quite apart from which, articles about fictional weapons? C'mon. Little, if any, assertion of notability. Moreschi ^Deletion! 10:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment So they should be deleted because they are fictional weapons? Do you feel the same about Lightsaber and Death Star? Edward321 00:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per all the above. --Folantin 11:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per my nom in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RX-78 Gundam. MER-C 12:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Merge and cleanup per WP:FICT. There is no point in deleting this when it can be merged and cleaned up under WP:FICT's guidelines, and the nominators are not given other editors time to evaluate and cleanup these articles. Also, if sources are a problem, then they should be requested first. Articles should not be deleted if they can be sourced. The nominators have made no attempt to do so. --Farix (Talk) 13:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Very weak merge to a list of Gundam mobile armours: assertion as first fully transformable suit possibly just enough to qualify it as a minor "character" per WP:FICT --Pak21 14:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Edison 15:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable. Xiner (talk, email) 19:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep While I suspect that I would vote for merge or delete were this article proposed singly, the sheer volume of recent nominations for deletion in this category makes the already short time to assess and/or improve said articles completely inadequate. Edward321 00:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep pending a more reasonably organized deletion discussion. AfDs in this manner are in bad taste and wastes time on both sides. -- Ned Scott 06:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Bad faith nomination, the nominator has been shotgunning entries at all sorts of mobile suit entries. Jtrainor 11:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. It's the first transformable robot in Gundam, and was piloted by not one but two important Zeta Gundam characters, including the main villain of the series. And yes, Moreschi does seem to be shotgunning in hopes of getting at least one Gundam articles deleted, so that he can use it as a precedent to come back for the rest. Redxiv 22:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and Cleanup per Redxiv. Kyaa the Catlord 00:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep If contents are arranged definitely, there is not a problem.--shikai shaw 07:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Moreschi. Wikipedia is not a Gundam guide. This article is appropriate for the Gundam Wiki. --maclean 07:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

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.