Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dialga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 speedy keep. «ct» (tk|e) 06:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dialga

Wikipedia is not the place to upload information about a minor character in a non-notable videogame. Skarlotte 15:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Keep-non-notable? It's Pokemon. Pokemon is very notable. -Sukecchi 15:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Keep-Yikes, as far as I know the Pokemon franchise is one of the most major and notable videogame-based full media franchises in the history of the industry, and Diamond and Pearl are currently the games in much of that industry's spotlights. Add to that that when the game is released in Japan in a little over a month, Diaruga and Parukia would easily be among the most notable characters especially since they will be on the covers to the game (and being on the cover and representative of the game actually gives them more point than all the other Pokemon creatures), so I think you might not be fully aware of the situation. :( Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 16:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, sorry but if you nominate one pokemon you might as well nominate all of them. Unless there's something considerably non-notable about this particular one then there isn't really any grounds for deletion.--Andeh 17:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep per Starblind and precedent. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 17:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep All of the characters in the Pokémon series are noteable, and though the article is at this point a stub, it will expand as new information becomes available. Pokémon games and their characters are definitely noteable. This personal vendetta you have is quite bluntly idiotic. Consider that both Bulbasaur and Torchic are featured articles. Coltonblue 18:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep per Erik. Highway Return to Oz... 19:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep as per above. What next, are you going to nominate all of the Pokemon related articles? How about the Pokemon portal? --Robaato 19:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep If Diaruga is nominated for deletion, why not delete every other Diamond and Pearl pokemon while your at it. This is nonsense to nominate a confirmed, and very notable pokemon (Its a lengendary) for deletion. From the information I've seen of Diargua, Diaruga isn't a minor character in the upcoming Pokemon games. It's one of the two main lengendary's along with Parukia, like Groudon and Kyogre of the Ruby, Sapphire and Emerald games. 0-172 19:54, 19 August (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep It's on the box art of one of the two DP games. It's a legendary. Even Serebii has it. This seems to be a bad faith nom. TrackerTV (CW|Castform|Green Valley) 20:12, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The page is actually at Dialga now. I am moving some stuff around to compensate. Please stand by. TrackerTV (CW|Castform|Green Valley) 20:13, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep of course. Horrendously bad faith, this stuff is going to be new every month. Toastypk 20:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep due to precedent, and dare I say it, passes the Pokemon test. --Kinu t/c 21:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep as per logic and Wikipedia policy. DanPMK 22:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep the fact that the user also tried to delete Pokémon Diamond and Pearl as well makes me question that this is nomination is in good faith. --Edgelord 02:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep: Like I wrote on the Palkia nomination: This article may not have much to it now, but that is because it is an article about a future release character. Within about a month, I'm sure that this article will expand and be just as relevent as every other Pokémon article. --SaturnYoshi 17:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia on every subject, and as long as the article is not nonsensical or about something not notable, it should be kept. -- 67.184.171.198 00:17, 21 August 2006 (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.