Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solarbeam

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.

[edit] Solarbeam

The result was delete. Bucketsofg 01:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Solarbeam (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable move in a class of Pokemon videogames. Does not assert notability, and definitely doesn't need an entire entry. Wikipedia is not GameFaq Haemo 03:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete subtrivial fancruft. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete wikipedia is not an indsicriminate collection of information. I bet there are thousands of "moves" in the Pokemon series and unless they get press coverage or some other type of verifiability they don't deserve articles. James086Talk 08:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - pure game guide material. MER-C 10:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, also appears to be original research. If it is the signature move of a specific Pokémon, then it may deserve a mention on their article. J Milburn 14:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep Important Aritcle --MikeHunt35 15:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, game guide (unencyclopedic). Punkmorten 15:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, game guide, WP:OR, fancruft. Terence Ong 17:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• I would say put all Pokemon moves into one big list, but failing that, Delete. -- Grev 02:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, as a member of the PCP, just let me say KILL IT; ITS WORTHLESS! -- The Hybrid 07:11, 28 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.