Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AS Alegrías

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 all. After ten days of AfD, the articles still lack any sources whatsoever. WP:V mandates deletion. As noted in the discussion, the two "keep" votes actually employ arguments for deletion. The articles' fair use images that are not used elsewhere are also being deleted. Sandstein 21:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AS Alegrías

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

Also included in this nomination are:

AS Soleares (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Folka Albark (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Axel Almer (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Alt Eisen (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Alt Eisen Riese (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This is a test case nomination covering the above six articles of a larger article pool in Category:Banpresto Originals, which currently lists 143 articles predominantly on characters from various incarnations of the Super Robot Wars video game series authored by Banpresto Originals. Almost all of the articles in the category are entirely unsourced and thus unverified and concomitantly, are presumptively original research. Though I think they're all probably verifiable, I don't think any of these, or the similarly situated articles in the category, are the subject of multiple, independent, reliable sources in conformance with our notability standards, and thus can never be made into proper, tertiary source, stand-alone articles.

Furthermore, per Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)#Fiction in Wikipedia:

• Major characters and major treatments of such matters as places and concepts in a work of fiction are covered in the article on that work. If an encyclopedic treatment of a character causes the article on the work itself to become long, that character is given a main article. Minor characters and minor treatments of such matters as places and concepts in a work of fiction are merged with short descriptions into a "List of characters."

And, per WP:NOT#PLOT (the language of which is tailored to articles on fictional stories, but the intent of the section extends quite naturally to things and characters from fictional universes):

• Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. A brief plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic, but not as a separate article..

I think articles on fictional universe items and characters, where the material is unverified and the subjects do not appear to be able to meet Wikipedia:Notability, should simply be deleted. But being mindful of the trend to merge such articles into a "lists of characters in..." per the above, I have pre-created a subpage with merged material for all six, coupled with a GFDL-compliant edit summary. Thus, though I'm recommending deletion, were this to close with a merge and delete/redirect consensus, the subpage can simply be moved to the mainspace under the name List of characters in the Super Robot Wars series or List of Banpresto Originals characters, which would also function as a repository for future nominations. I have merged each article's material, such as it is, only in bare summary; that is in keeping with recommendations at WP:FICTION, and since the material is unverified, its current form is not sacrosanct but rather subject to removal at any time. Note that I attempted to redirect a few of these articles to Super Robot Wars already, and was promptly reverted [1], [2].

Evidence: For all six articles I have searched:

• Google web: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8];
• Google books: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]; and
• Google news: [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20].

Not a one came back with any results for news or books. For the web searches, as can be expected, I found some listings, ranging from 23 unique hits to a high of a little over 200. I scanned at least the first thirty hits for each article's search and found not one source that appeared to contain significant treatment of the subject and was independent and reliable—indeed, the majority appear to be message boards, blogs, fan sites and the like. Note that I did not cherry-pick especially problematic entries out of the category. These are the first six articles therein that are on stand-alone characters.

Mindful that large, mass AfDs have historically caused problems—especially for those whose exercise of due diligence before stating their opinion would require too much research time—I am nominating just these six. However, as I have stated, this is intended as a test case; I expect, depending on the result, to nominate more articles in separate AfDs, using consensus here for precedential purposes. Thus, though I apologize for the breadth of this nomination, I am striving for exceeding thoroughness--Fuhghettaboutit 05:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

• So basically, you have a problem with works of Fiction, and want to destroy the work that went into creating those pages? Can I infer from this that you'll also be deleting the other 130+ pages in this category simply because they are fiction, regardless if they're based on people, machines or orginizations? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Monarch (talk • contribs) 2007-07-29T10:04:56 (UTC).

• No, but as Fuhghettaboutit explained, everything in Wikipedia needs to be verified with reliable sources (WP:RS) - basically you need to provide the sources where the information used for the article comes from (look for example at the references section of any of the myriad of Pokemon articles like Anorith to see what is required). As the google results above show, finding sources for the robot wars characters is not easily possible to do for someone else. So that alone is reason to delete them. --Minimaki 11:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
• Perhaps one small issue with finding the information lies within the language and country of origin for this category. Super Robot Wars was created in Japan, and has a huge fanbase over there. Thus it makes sense that the majority of the information you would have to find on them would be in Japanese. For example [21]

• Japanese sources should be ok. As long as all the information gets sourced, I'd also say merge then, as described below by Magenta Galaxy. --Minimaki 23:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

and here is a list of the six names in their original Japanese form to help you with your searches on the web.

AS Alegrías- ASアレグリアス AS Soleares- ASソレアレス Folka Albark- フォルカ・アルバーク Axel Almer- アクセル・アルマー Alt Eisen- アルトアイゼン Alt Eisen Riese- アルトアイゼン リーゼ

Conversely, the English exposure to this series of games is somewhat limited. Wikipedia, which is a place for people to discover information about a wide variety of topics, has proven to be a place where the translated information can be assimilated. While it may be prudent to condense some pages together (i.e. Alt Eisen and Alt Eisen Riese are essentially the same machine, being the pre and post upgraded forms respectively), there is no reason to simply remove the large amount of information dedicated to each page simply because its fiction from another country. -Monarch

• Merge into "List of characters" and Delete. It seems like an important conversation. Presumably each of these could be sourced, though not necessarily with an online source. (I'd guess the game manual or something was involved in creating these pages.) The question is whether each has notability to stand alone. Wikipedia's policy on fictional characters is currently (in short, summarizing from above wikilink) (1) Major characters are covered in the article of the work unless it becomes too long, in which case they are separated out, and (2) Minor characters receive short descriptions in "List of characters"--either in the body of the article on the work or as a separate article. These do not seem to be major characters. Moonriddengirl 13:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

• Axel Almar is the protagonist for Super Robot Wars Advance, while Folka Albark is the main protagonist for Super Robot Wars Compact 3. The Alt Eisen and Alt Eisen Riese are one of the main machines the player uses in Super Robot Wars Impact, and in the Original Generation series. The AS Soleares and AS Alegrías are one of the selectable main machines for Super Robot Wars Alpha 3. How are these considered NOT major characters if they affect the majority of the storyline in their respective apperances? -Monarch

If they're major characters (and I'm not sure that being a "selectable main machine" qualifies), their articles need to assert that they are. There's not much assertion of notability in "The AS Alegrías is a fictional robot in the Super Robot Wars series. It has appeared as a playable unit in Super Robot Wars Alpha 3 only." But even if they are major characters, they're still to be covered in the article of the work unless it becomes too long. I see Folka Albark was "a playable character" in Super Robot Wars Compact 3--the fictional work apparently doesn't even have a page. Seems like it would have room to cover its major characters. Moonriddengirl 00:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Super Robot Wars Compact 3 came out in Japan in 2003 for the WonderSwan, a Japanese exclusive gaming system which currently has no plans of coming to the US. As such, the game in question will probably not be translated to english. Therefore, the page for Super Robot Wars Compact 3 would have to be created from information translated from in a manuel or in-game text that comes from the fourth most complex language in the world. It takes time to translate a project of that magnitude, and therefore must be considered a work-in-progress, just like any other page on Wikipedia. Essentially, you are citizing his page for a small grammatical error of 'playable' instead of 'main' (this shall be rectified forthwith). Also, as for the case of the AS Alegrías, accessing the page for Super Robot Wars Alpha 3 would inform you that it is one of the main character's machines as it is the upgraded form of the AS Soleares, or would you prefer the redunancy of a few lines on all the relivant pages? -Monarch

Essentially, I am questioning the need for a full, separate page for each fictional character related to this project. Merging into the proposed List of characters in the Super Robot Wars series seems reasonable to me, as per Wikipedia guidelines. Moonriddengirl 02:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

So then you think it fully appropriate to keep each article in its full-length form as they currently are, only compiled onto one master list in order to save space? (This is, in essance, to save the amount of work previously translated and compiled to avoid the sheer and utter bleakness that Fuhghettaboutit has proposed.) If this is the case, would keeping human and mecha seperate be acceptable? -Monarch

Well, I'm just one editor here and can't say whether the list would become unmanageably huge if they were combined as they are, but it does sound like it's worth a try. :) Personally, I think it's a good idea to create lists separated by human and mecha if the single list is too long. As a reference guide, I would imagine it would be useful to your audience, too, to have them together. Moonriddengirl 12:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps something similar to the way the Japanese Wikipedia handles the situation. Have two seperate "main" listings - one for SRW characters and one for mechs, and then in the cases where particular characters or groups of characters need more information, link to a seperate page. For example, the Japanese Wikipedia has a List of Banpresto Original Characters, which provides minor one-paragraph biographies of the characters, and then also links to a more detailed mass container document (for example, ATX Team). This would allow us to preserve the information in a more easily categorized format that has been established on the Japanese wikipedia already - and hence would allow the information presented there to be more easily translated and transferred to the English Wikipedia. Just a thought. Magenta Galaxy 14:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete These are all fictional "robots" that severely lack any real world coverage. This would be much more appropriate at a specialized encyclopedia, where it could be transwikied to Corpx 17:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I think that Super Robot Wars info should be kept in Wikipedia since it's difficult to find information about that game series in English. --Luisedgarf 03:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I agree with Luisedgarf; Wikipedia is the main site that myself and many others I know use to look up information about Banpresto Original characters, and if you delete that category altogether, there really isn't any other english site that has information about the characters/mechs. Jonny 04:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Well, WP:USEFUL won't be a good reason not to merge them like in the Japanese WP. --Minimaki 10:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment "difficulty of finding information about them" and Wikipedia being the "main site" to "look [them] up", when they are unsourced here, are arguments for deletion.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Still about their relevance, I will establish some more points. 1 - AS Alegrías / Soleares - The Alegrías and Soleares easily constitute one of the most relevant pages in Super Robot Wars. Being one of the protagonists of Super Robot Wars Alpha 3, you can select Selena Recital as your protagonist. In that way, the Alegrías and Soleares will appear in more than 60 different stages, with an extremely personal story that depends only on the mech you choose - It's not just aesthetic, playing with Selena Recital is a different *game* than playing with other characters.

2 - Axel Arma/Almer - Besides being the male lead for Super Robot Wars Advance, where he is either the main character, with one corresponding personality and background, or the main rival, with another completely different one (Also, soon to be the lead of Super Robot Wars i, a conversion of Advance to mobile phones), he is the rival of the undisputed lead of Super Robot Wars Original Generation 2, Kyosuke Nanbu. He also has a large background, being one of Banpresto's most cherished characters.

3 - Alt Eisen / Alt Eisen Riese - Definitely merge. In this case, since the Riese is a mid/late game upgrade to the original Alt Eisen (one of the 2 main protagonists' mech from SRW: Original Generation, the main protagonist's mech from SRW: Original Generation 2, as well as the main mech of Super Robot Wars Impact), it doesn't deserve a page of its own.

4 - Folka Albark - Possibly the most important entry here. Altough Folka is only the protagonist of one relatively unknown SRW, Super Robot Wars Compact 3 for the WonderSwan Color, he is still an important character. In Super Robot Wars Original Generations, he is a late-game rival. In the upcoming Super Robot Wars Original Generations Gaiden (unconfirmed title), he will be one of the selectable main protagonists according to an important magazine scan.

Signed, Kind Anon.

• Comment I also do support merging most of the articles to emulate the Japanese Wikipedia format for these said articles. But I noticed that other plot-heavy games such as Final Fantasy 12 & Metal Gear Solid 3 for example, use actual quotes from the game as references, since some Super Robot War games include an encyclopedia within the software I fail to see why that cannot be used as a reference. Furthermore, the main site [22], has plenty of information that can be regarded as references. Most of the articles can also be backed up by [23], unfortunately as a promotional pre-order gift, it lacks an ISBN number due to the fact that it was not meant for commercial release. Is there still anyway this can be regarded as a source? -Another Anon

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.