Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MAN-05 Gromlin

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 per WP:FICT. --Coredesat 19:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MAN-05 Gromlin

MAN-05 Gromlin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

During a mass de-prodding of articles by TheFarix on Gundam related articles, I reviewed the various removals of the subst'd {{prod}} and have listed this one, the MAN-05 Gromlin for deletion, as it does not assert its own importance in the Gundam metaseries.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 03:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy delete Oh come on. This is an encyclopedia, not an... I don't know what... this doesn't belong here whatever the case. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 01:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment This is more what I like to see instead of the WP:POINTed {{Prod}}ding of articles in-mass without no regard to if it should be cleaned up, merger, or deleted. --Farix (Talk) 02:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, and due to lack of sources. Edison 06:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per my nom in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AMX-104 R-Jarja. MER-C 06:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Super SPeed-Delete Yup, get rid of em all. It's an article of ONLY headlines MiracleMat 07:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per my PROD nomination. Moreschi ^Deletion! 09:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails every policy that is supposed to apply to this kind of article. --Folantin 09:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Absolutely. Akihabara 11:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: no encyclopedic content at all. --Pak21 14:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep While I suspect that I would vote for merge or delete were this article proposed singly, the sheer volume of recent nominations for deletion in this category makes the already short time to assess and/or improve said articles completely inadequate. Edward321 00:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep pending a more reasonably organized deletion discussion. AfDs in this manner are in bad taste and wastes time on both sides. -- Ned Scott 06:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep, pending somebody actually writing this article. If there's no chance of that happening, then redirect to G Generation Original Units. Redxiv 22:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Merge into a listing with other G-Generation units. The SD Gundam: G-Generation stuff doesn't have much in the way of official information (i.e. Bandai's MS Encyclopedia series of books), certainly not enough to warrant a standalone article for the likes of the Sisquede(sic), Gromlin, Gundam Mk.IV, etc. Could be Transwikied to GundamWiki as well, but only a couple of people seem to be giving that an honest effort at the moment. Maikeru 04:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep If contents are arranged definitely, there is not a problem.--shikai shaw 16:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not establish notability as a major character, places, concepts, etc. --maclean 07:01, 16 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.