Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle Frontier

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, discounting several WP:ILIKEIT votes, and not fixing the WP:RS and WP:V concerns. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Battle Frontier

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

Violates WP:RS and WP:V therefore WP:NOR, and most definitly Wikipedia is not a video game guide. Also notability has not been established. Chris M. 16:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Completely in-universe; independent sources that discuss this particular location would be needed to establish notability. Trebor 19:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- Farix (Talk) 20:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Merge WP:RS and WP:V are silly arguments, quickly laid to rest by a simple Google search. WP:NOTE, on the other hand, might apply. Since this article details a component of a video game, anime story arc, and a trading card game, this article ought to be merged into those main articles. Snarfies 14:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

  A simple Google Search came up with uses of "Battle Frontier" but I couldn't find "reliable sources" discussing the subject in and of itself. If there were some that could verify the information of the article, since it is very well done, I'd think they would have been added already. Of course, them not being added yet not being a valid reason to bring it here, I simply don't think it's notable enough to ever have reliable sources. But yes notability is a more valid criteria for a merge/deletion. Chris M. 00:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

• keep or merge it is a very well done article and the reasons it was brought up for deletion are not valid--E tac 11:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Discounted Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• keep i have to agree i dont see why this qualifies for deletion Mdawg728 18:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

  It doesn't have reliable sources and will most likely not have any, and it most importantly it doesn't establish WP:Notability Chris M. 00:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

Discounted Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Only appears in the anime and one video game. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete or merge. It doesn't really matter. This article needs to be cut waaaaaay down and mentioned in Pokémon Emerald, since it's a special feature of that game. Whether it's merged or deleted, though, it'll eventually get a proper mention there, so it really doesn't matter. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, verifiable information as worthy of an article as Pokémon gym. --WikidSmaht (talk) 02:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Merge into Pokémon Emerald. What the hell do you mean "it's not notable"? I don't keep track of the anime at all, and I still know that the most recent US season revolves entirely around the Battle Frontier, not to mention the fact that it was by far the single biggest change made to Hoenn from Ruby and Sapphire, and was at the center of many of Nintendo's advertisements of the game.
  That said, I don't think it necessarily needs its own article, but it's plenty notable enough to have a few paragraphs in a related article, preferably in Pokémon Emerald. By no means does it deserve deletion. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 05:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

  It may be important to the fictional world (don't get me wrong, I know exactly how important it is in Pokémon), but this is an encyclopedia about the real one. We need references establishing notability in the real world. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

  Then I'll repeat myself: it's the focus and subtitle of the entire eighth (and current) season of the anime. If that's not real-world notability then I don't know what the hell is. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 06:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

  Where are the references, though? This isn't notable because it seems to fail both WP:FICT and the primary notability criterion. (One could argue that it's Yet Another Area Where Ash And Friends Meet Pokémon Trainers, Overcome New Challenges, Make New Friends, And Learn About Themselves, and that the anime makes little emphasis on trivia of location.) There's a tendency to draw the mistaken conclusion of "Foo is important in the real world" from "Pokémon is important in the real world" and "Foo is related to Pokémon", so we need to focus on the primary notability criterion so we can write well-referenced articles.

  I realize that this is going to be merged to Pokémon Emerald (but it needs to be disambiguated between Pokémon Emerald and List of Pokémon: Battle Frontier episodes), but it's very likely that its mention there will be necessarily brief, sourced primarily to reviews that made note of it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Partial conspiracy with A Man In Black; I don't think the article should be deleted, but should be merged instead because it does have some Notability in it. In the event where this article fails Reliable Sources, No Original Research and Verifiability, I think the first paragraph of the entire article would be one of the few, if not the only, exception. However, I reluctantly agree that there is too much information given in the article, and a large portion of it would probably be a billion times better off in StrategyWiki or likewise. Look at how this article is written, for instance. Certain sections actually have a link to StrategyWiki but do not contain excessive information. -- Altiris Exeunt 10:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - article meets WP:N as a major change to the RSE lineup and significant plot line of the anime. The info is sourceable and verifiable, and does not give instruction (merely description - which is completely ok accoding to info at WP:WAF and WP:RS) therefore these claims of "game-guide" are unfounded. I went through a few months ago and rm a lot of info that gave suggestions and strategy hints. A couple sentences throughout thew article could be removed becuase they specualate, and the anime section needs to be rewritten - but a large portion is fine and would constitute too large of a section to be properly merged. -ΖαππερΝαππερ ^Babel_Alexandria 19:35, 21 February 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.