Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthas Menethil (2nd nomination)

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. WP:WAX is not a persuasive argument to keep when the article suffers from a lack of sources and a serious WP:V/WP:NOR problem. Sandstein 07:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arthas Menethil

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

Another WoW character article that does not meet notability requirements, does not meet WP:Fiction, is mostly fancruft, and is completely unsourced (except for article previewing the game he appears in). This character is already covered in the List of Warcraft characters and does not need his own article. The game is notable, every character in it is not. Collectonian (talk) 03:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. I think it's safe to say that this character is the single most notable of all those in the Warcraft universe. Not commenting on the article's status, hence not voting, but he is to Warcraft what Jean-Luc Picard is to Star Trek (my quote from Picard with the merge notice was reference to the fact that we have pages like Nog and friends, which also is not voting criteria but food for thought). Luatha (talk) 03:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• delete article content is all "in universe", there is no encyclopedic content, no analysis of the character which might be of value to anyone not a fan of the game. The sole "reference" for this putative encyclopedia article is a game review, not a secondary source treatment of the character "Arthas Menethil". I see no evidence at all of the "extensive coverage" in reliable secondary sources as required by WP:N. This is pure fan cruft. Pete.Hurd (talk) 04:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Non notable, and nothing of encyclopedic value here. Also, the article is no where near sufficiently sourced, and has the familiar tone of fancruft. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Merge (after cutting down) into List of Warcraft characters#Arthas Menethil. Not notable enough for a separate article, but it seems he's important enough to the series to have more than one paragraph in the list. Pagrashtak 15:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Pagrashtak 15:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
• Merge - His notability my increase over time, so lets save the information and merge him into the characters list. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - wasn't this nominated 3 weeks ago? Surely nominations have a common sense cooldown, or do thing keeps getting nominated until they're removed, and thus can't be nominated again? Kirkburn (talk) 18:42, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the previous nomination until after I'd already renominated, though with the last nomination ending in no consensus, I don't think renomination is too bad in this case. Collectonian (talk) 18:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Whereas dozens of other Warcraft characters are not notable, Arthas is one of them who actually is. One of the mainest characters in the series (if that's a word). Axem Titanium (talk) 04:16, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

  If that's true, there's no way that those of us who don't play Warcraft would know that. Could you provide some secondary sources to show this? Pagrashtak 15:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. If both Sarah Kerrigan and Jim Raynor of the Starcraft series deserve separate writeups, why not Arthas Menethil of the Warcraft series? He's essentially become its signature character and "poster boy." His face is on the cover of the Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne expansion pack, just like Kerrigan's face is on the StarCraft: Brood War expansion pack. He's even on the cover of the upcoming World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King, which would seemingly beat Kerrigan's box top exposure. I'd sooner delete Jim Raynor's writeup than Arthas's. That said, I agree that the article is badly written and somewhat unhelpful. Mynabird 07:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Nothing against his character, but to keep the article, we must have notability established by references to verify the content. IN other words, stuff like, how did they come up with this character? What were their influences? What did video game reviewers say about his role in the games? If you don't have that, delete.Judgesurreal777 04:48, 2 December 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.